Christians, national greatness, and immigration

Most of the people trying to get into Westernized countries in Europe are muslims whose ultimate goal is the Caliphate. Europe is slowly becoming islamatized. Look at France, for an example.

This article is quite enlightening:

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-yeor100902.asp

For those who wish to look at the true issues surrounding Mexican immigration to the US, this article is quite enlightening:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=13863

 

C4K, US official foreign aid is about $15 billion annually.

Americans privately give at least $34 billion overseas each year.

That would seem to indicate we have a desire to share the wealth.

On the other hand, I don't think the US, or any other developed nation, is obligated to allow itself to be swamped.

 

You really mean, trying to "get in it". Right ?

Anyway.

Poor folk always try to get rich into urbanized, industrialized regions....or countries.

It's like, they feel they have better chances there of improving their lives.

Maybe so, to some.

Others would be better off in their own countries.

On a much smaller scale, in my country, the Philippines, those from the provinces want to get to the cities, for jobs, for opportunities, as a springboard to go abroad.

Everything is almost the same, you know, only the scales are different.

 

If the center of your argument is money, then wouldnt it be good to start exploring the problem by asking, since the United States and Mexico have existed next to each other for 200 some odd years, why is one nation rich and the other poor? Do you think our way of life might be do to the fact we did something right, and they didnt? And if that is the case, why should we feel guilty for that as Americans?

What is it that you expect Americans to do about immigration? Do you expect us to forgo national soverignty to compensate for Mexico's inability to manage their affairs?

Yes, this nation has lots of problems, but it is our nation, and ours to set its own destiny, not another country. Personally, I wouldnt live anywhere else.

 

Take what you wish from this news item:

http://www.wsmv.com/print/13422127/detail.html

While there are bad reasons for people to come to the US (or other wealthier nations), there are also good reasons why some people wish to come here.

(NOTE: The actual broadcast TV interview with this person demonstrated that he [and many like him] want to give back to the US in gratitude for the opportunities the US has given him and his family.)

 

It is either an indication of how well a country is perceived or an indication of how badly the country being left behind is perceived.

A country is great only according to the blessings bestowed upon it by God Almighty and even then to God be the glory.

However, the perceived premise that the United States of America is rich is, I believe, highly inaccurate. Most of the citizenry is in debt, those that are not in debt possess Federal Reserve Notes or Federal Reserve digits which are not redeemable for anything of value. Property is another indicator of wealth and freedom and yet the citizenry owns no property as most have mortgage notes and those that pay off the note still pay rent to the local governments known as property tax. If the citizen does not pay the tax then the citizen loses the property to the actual owners. It seems to me that often times people believe America is rich because Americans can buy lots of goods and yet practically and spiritually this is not a good indicator of wealth. Practically it just means the bankers are letting you go into deeper debt and spiritually it is worthless.

"Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:" - Revelation 3:17​

The country's federal government is not rich as they currently have a debt burden which will never be paid down under the current economic system and the government is allowed to sustain itself only at the behest of those that will continue to lend to it. When those lenders decide that the risk of not being paid back is too high, then they will stop lending and the government will be in an economic crises that will rival or surpass that of 1929 Germany.

Now, if it is a truth that the borrower is servant to the lender. One should ask themselves who the United States government is servant to.

"The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender." - Proverbs 22:7​

A Christian should support the rule of law or support the change of law if a law is unjust or the nullification of enforcement of the law through jury nullification. However, I do not believe there is an argument for a Christian to support the non-enforcement of the law. Our current laws are opposed to illegal immigration (thus the "illegal" descriptor). If one does not support the enforcement of law, then one supports anarchy. If one supports the elimination of our border or the non-enforcement of our border laws, then one does not support the United States of America but rather supports the creation of a new country namely, the North American Union.

We should be willing to share our wealth on an individual basis as led by God (not by governmental force through taxation). Yes, we should build barriers (we were once able to protect our borders without a literal wall so I believe we can do the same today) to keep out individuals of other countries unless we no longer desire to be a sovereign country and unless we desire to become as their countries are. The solution is to put an end to this antichrist globalistic situation. The solution is to get our own house in order and then spread the gospel and the principles of (true) freedom and self-reliance to foreign nations via persuasion not force and not subsidy.

 

Strange days indeed. :wavey:

 

Oklahoma Trivia:

What other state has for their football team a fighting song
that celebrates illegal immigrants?
(The football fight song is called: 'BOOMER! SOONER!' )

"Sooners"-those who got on U.S. Government
give-away land before the starting gun and hid
while some other member of the family raced
to claim the land at the claims
office. These sooners were first called "moonlighters"
before they started calling them "Sooners".

"Boomers" were people that kept moving into the
Indian Territory to try to force the U.S. Congress
to open up the territory (i.e. break their treaty
with the Indians).

Sidenote: Until about 1994, the majority of Oklahoma
voters were also members of a Southern Baptist Church.

 

Rufus, that was a very excellent post! :applause: