Undocumented immigrants

[mandym]

They are still criminals though...which is the main point raised by several here - the fact of their criminality. Why would it matter what jurisdiction they are criminals in? For instance, if they were rapists/thieves/murderers/etc. in Mexico, wouldn't you still consider them rapists even though they have broken no US law? After all, breaking the law is breaking the law and criminals are criminals.

I am not talking about how the US should deal with them, but how is many people's reaction here consistent or reasonable given that most would probably excuse illegal emigration (if not find it outright commendable). Why condemn one type of criminal but not another simply due to the question of jurisdiction?

Would you prosecute someone who broke into your house? I suppose not since you want to ignore immigration laws. Other wise you would be a hypocrite.

 

[dwmoeller1]

I'm really not understanding your question.

Most people are against those who enter this country illegally; by your own statement, you're talking about people who enter this country legally. What does illegal entry into this country have to do with illegally leaving another country?

My question is to those who have made a big deal about the fact that illegal immigrants are criminals and lawbreakers (most specifically I am referring to freeatlast's posts) . I point out the fact that illegal emigrants are also criminals. So are they going to be consistent and condemn those people as well, or are they going to qualify their position so it is more consistent?

And the larger question I want to raise is: So what if they are breaking the law? Why does it *really* matter - matter so much that people get really worked up about it?

Sure we can all agree that it would be better if they (and everyone else) did not break the law, but I am fairly certain that we don't view all lawbreaking in the same terms. Its one thing to say that you should not kill, its a very different thing to say you shouldn't speed. Yet many seem to view illegal immigration more towards the murder end of the spectrum and I am wondering why. Why not instead view it more towards the speeding (or jaywalking) end of the spectrum - where we may encourage others not to do it but generally don't get too worked up over it (and probably have been guilty of it ourselves at least once)?

 

[dwmoeller1]

Would you prosecute someone who broke into your house? I suppose not since you want to ignore immigration laws. Other wise you would be a hypocrite.

Describe the ways in which crossing a border illegally is akin to breaking into someone's house? I can see nothing but a surface similarity. Therefore I see no inconsistency in treating them very differently.

Secondly, I have not once here excused illegal immigration. I agree that they should not do it and that the laws should be enforced. I am suggesting that we change the laws. That we make it very easy for them to enter legally - that immigration no longer be made so restrictive. That is my position - not that we should simply ignore the laws. I just don't see why people get so worked up over it - why they see it like breaking into someone's house instead of something more along the lines of ignoring a "do not walk on the grass" sign in a public park.

As to your original question, no, I would not prosecute someone who broke into my house...but that's a whole different topic

 

[Salty]

Would you prosecute someone who broke into your house? I suppose not since you want to ignore immigration laws. Other wise you would be a hypocrite.

Yes, I would press charges against someone who broke into my home. But, I would not press charges against someone who broke into your home. That would be up to you. Now, if I was a witness and you asked me to testify, I would.


But, keep in mind, those who fled countries such as the USSR were doing often to protect their life. Just because someone asked for political asylum, did not mean they would get it.

 

[freeatlast]

Yes, I would press charges against someone who broke into my home. But, I would not press charges against someone who broke into your home. That would be up to you. Now, if I was a witness and you asked me to testify, I would.


But, keep in mind, those who fled countries such as the USSR were doing often to protect their life. Just because someone asked for political asylum, did not mean they would get it.

Illegals are not seeking political asylum. They are seeking, at tax payer expense, free schooling with meals, free or subsidized housing, free medical, freedoms they did not fight and die for and working under the table so as most do not to pay taxes.

 

[mandym]

Describe the ways in which crossing a border illegally is akin to breaking into someone's house? I can see nothing but a surface similarity. Therefore I see no inconsistency in treating them very differently.

Of course////

 

[Salty]

What about illegal emigration? What of those who leave their countries illegally ...but were able to enter the US legally? Would you react to them in the same way you would illegal immigrants? Why or why not?

Illegals are not seeking political asylum. .

Free, I agree with you 100%
I was simply trying to explain to dwmoeller1 (from his post above) that there is a difference in those illegals,(such as you described) and those who entered the US leagally, but did leave their home country illegally.

But dwmoeller1, I do have a questions for you. Suppose a citizen of the USSR had come to visit the USA on a legal visa - with permission from the USSR to travel. Upon his arrival in the US, he decides to request political asylum - and it is granted. Is he any different than the East German who escaped East Berlin and request political asylum from the US - technically (only) Berlin was still under Allied/USA Occupation.

And for what it was worth- the East Germans were told the Wall was put up to keep the Capitalist West from getting into Berlin

 

[billwald]

This post is on topic because the topic is now enforcing burglary laws vs. enforcing immigration laws.


I thought all you true believing Repubs believed in jury nullification? How can such a person demand that all laws be equally enforced?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

 

[freeatlast]

This post is on topic because the topic is now enforcing burglary laws vs. enforcing immigration laws.


I thought all you true believing Repubs believed in jury nullification? How can such a person demand that all laws be equally enforced?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

Very few people even know that a jury has the right to disregard the law if they feel it is unjust and find a person not guilty even if they are guilty according to law.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Illegals are not seeking political asylum. They are seeking, at tax payer expense, free schooling with meals, free or subsidized housing, free medical, freedoms they did not fight and die for and working under the table so as most do not to pay taxes.

The facts do not support your assertion.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Of course////

Yet you don't show what elements make them reasonably comparable. If you want your comparison to be meaningful then give some argument in support.

 

[Salty]

The facts do not support your assertion.

Okay, you want facts - here are some facts!!!

May I recommend something? Sometimes the best way to prove something is trying to disprove it. Another words play devils advocate - and seek the truth. Most people refuse to do that as they are afraid of finding out the truth.

and here is another fact - you have not answered my question in post 107.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Okay, you want facts - here are some facts!!!

Let's just start with the fact that your example isn't about immigrants, much less illegal immigrants.

May I recommend something? Sometimes the best way to prove something is trying to disprove it. Another words play devils advocate - and seek the truth. Most people refuse to do that as they are afraid of finding out the truth.

It's not blindingly obvious that I am playing DA in this thread?

and here is another fact - you have not answered my question in post 107.

Observe the pattern of my posting and you will notice that I am getting to it.

 

[freeatlast]

The facts do not support your assertion.

What facts?

 

[Salty]

Let's just start with the fact that your example isn't about immigrants, much less illegal immigrants.

Well, if you dont I want to consider facts I presented :tonofbricks:- as requested - I will not waste any more of my time.

 

[BroTom64]

Just Curious

Has anyone read the complete Resolution? After wading through 115 posts, I didn't see one link to the Resolution or one quote beyond the snippet in the original article.

A littl more light might be helpful.

Here is the Resolution in Full: http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/amResolution.asp?ID=1213

Incase the lnk does not work:

On Immigration And The Gospel
June 2011

​

WHEREAS, The Kingdom of God is made up of persons from every tribe, tongue, nation, and language (Revelation 7:9); and

WHEREAS, Our ancestors in the faith were sojourners and aliens in the land of Egypt (Exodus 1:1-14; 1 Chronicles 16:19; Acts 7:6); and

WHEREAS, Our Lord Jesus Christ lived His childhood years as an immigrant and refugee (Matthew 2:13-23); and

WHEREAS, The Scriptures call us, in imitation of God Himself, to show compassion and justice for the sojourner and alien among us (Exodus 22:21; Deuteronomy 10:18-19; Psalm 94:6; Jeremiah 7:6; Ezekiel 22:29; Zechariah 7:10); and

WHEREAS, The Great Commission compels us to take the gospel to the nations (Matthew 28:18-20), and the Great Commandment compels us to love our neighbor as self (Mark 12:30-31); and

WHEREAS, The gospel tells us that our response to the most vulnerable among us is a response to Jesus Himself (Matthew 25:40); and

WHEREAS, The Bible denounces the exploitation of workers and the mistreatment of the poor (Isaiah 3:15; Amos 4:1; James 5:4); and

WHEREAS, The United States of America is increasingly diverse in terms of ethnicity, language, and culture; and

WHEREAS, Approximately 12 to 15 million undocumented immigrants live and work within our borders; and

WHEREAS, The relative invisibility of the immigrant population can lead to detrimental consequences in terms of health, education, and well-being, especially of children; and

WHEREAS, Recognizing that Romans 13:1-7 teaches us that the rule of law is an indispensable part of civil society and that Christians are under biblical mandate to respect the divinely-ordained institution of government and its just laws, that government has a duty to fulfill its ordained mandate, and that Christians have a right to expect the government to fulfill its ordained mandate to enforce those laws; and

WHEREAS, The governing authorities of a nation have the right and responsibility to maintain borders to protect the security of their citizens; and

WHEREAS, Undocumented immigrants are in violation of the law of the land; and

WHEREAS, Many of these persons, desiring a better future for themselves and their families, are fleeing brutal economic and political situations; and

WHEREAS, The issue of immigration has prompted often-rancorous debate in the American public square; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Phoenix, Arizona, June 14-15, 2011, call on our churches to be the presence of Christ, in both proclamation and ministry, to all persons, regardless of country of origin or immigration status; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we declare that any form of nativism, mistreatment, or exploitation is inconsistent with the gospel of Jesus Christ; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we deplore any bigotry or harassment against any persons, regardless of their country of origin or legal status; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we ask our governing authorities to prioritize efforts to secure the borders and to hold businesses accountable for hiring practices as they relate to immigration status; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we ask our governing authorities to implement, with the borders secured, a just and compassionate path to legal status, with appropriate restitutionary measures, for those undocumented immigrants already living in our country; and be it further

RESOLVED, That this resolution is not to be construed as support for amnesty for any undocumented immigrant; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we pray for our churches to demonstrate the reconciliation of the Kingdom both in the verbal witness of our gospel and in the visible makeup of our congregations; and be it finally

RESOLVED, That we affirm that while Southern Baptists, like other Americans, might disagree on how to achieve just and humane public policy objectives related to immigration, we agree that, when it comes to the gospel of Jesus Christ and to His church, the message, in every language and to every person, is “Whosoever will may come.”



May the Lord bless each of you as you tell the World about His great salvation.

Tom
​

 

[BroTom64]

Other 2011 SBC Rsolutions

All 2011 SBC resolutions can be found at this link:
http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/AMResSearchYear.asp?SearchBy=Year&frmData=2011&Search2=Search