There are many folks writing and speaking
out against the Trump Administration policy of separating children from their
parents, those who have sought to enter the U.S. without permission, or
illegally. I am sure my voice will not
add much to what is being said, but I do feel it right to say something about
it and not remain silent.
Every once in a while our government does
something it thinks is necessary to solve a problem and makes a choice to do
something that is immoral, wrong, and/or even a crime against humanity. We are a very “legal” nation so the
government usually takes pains to declare something to be legal, even when it
is morally wrong. One example was the
policy of torture during the Bush administration.
Much
of the time the executive branch is responsible for creating a “policy” to
define how laws will be carried out. The
Legislative branch is supposed to be the branch that makes laws but many people
are affected by how the Executive branch defines and executes those laws, or by
how the Supreme Court interprets them.
Again, torture was a policy, not a law passed by Congress. Abortion was allowed due to a SCOTUS
decision, not by a law passed by Congress.
Expediency and politics often are the
driving forces in creating such policies.
The internment of Japanese citizens was such an expediency, the removal
of Native Americans from their own lands was such an expediency. History gives us more perspective years after
an event, and after destroyed lives and bodies too. Law enforcement is put into a dilemma as its
personnel have to carry out such “laws” even when some of its members might
have some conscience about enforcing things which cause obvious outrage among
many of our people.
Politics becomes a hindrance to moral
considerations because parties don’t like to be criticized by the other side,
and thus political parties attempt to discard moral arguments as mere political
leverage in an argument.
We have an obvious problem in our country
when it comes to immigration, both legal and illegal. Even the legal side is confusing, onerous,
cumbersome, and intimidating. Our present
policies bear little resemblance to what is written on the Statute of Liberty
or to the spirit and history of the land of freedom and the beacon of liberty
from those who come from oppression and poverty.
We have varying views of how to handle the
flow of immigrants and it has been one that has flipped and flopped, ebbed and
flowed, over the years. At one time America
had pretty wide open borders for some, and absolutely closed for others. It was wide open for white people who came
with guns and took the lands they wanted.
It was a border not wanting to be crossed by Africans who were brought
here against their will. It was a border
already crossed by Spaniards in lands settled by them well before the Americans
got to the West. It was a land closed to
the “yellow peril” except for labor to build the railroads and do mining, up
until the 1960’s. People from Asia of
varying countries were not welcome until the second half of the Twentieth
Century.
Immigration has had an effect. The idea that it is always good and helpful
is certainly debatable. Beside a secular idea of individual freedom what
culture do we already have that is worth protecting and preserving? There has always been some sort of fight
going on between Deism, the Enlightenment, Secular Humanism, and the ideology of
the Protestant Reformation. Without
religious liberty, without religious morality and ethics, would America be
America? Can our culture, if our culture
is worth maintaining, survive mass influxes of Muslim and Eastern thought and
philosophy?
Jews and Catholics have been absorbed into
our American culture and have made it richer, while adjusting to the reality of
what was already here. In short they
gave up things to survive while America has had to come to grips with
protecting their rights. So, when our government
policy became more liberal in the openness of immigration to all nations,
religions, and groups some of our people become alarmed at changes perceived to
be taking place around them.
Job competition, religious competition,
linguistic competition, and the downright mobbing of borders by people refusing
to be slowed by procedure and process has caused a reaction. Some of that reaction is xenophobic, and some
of it is sort of a righteous indignation that people are “dishing” the line. Stories and incidents of terrorism and crime
are alarming, and violent foreign ideologies and individual criminals need to
be identified, resisted, and rejected.
None of us should be blaming people for wanting to come here. We as a nation should be the destination for anyone seeking a better way of life on this planet. Our hope would be that every other nation could have such freedom and prosperity so its people would not want to leave where they are. Unfortunately there are too many places of violence, oppression, and desperation. Immigration has always brought enterprising and risk taking individuals to our shores.
Once again our present Executive branch is
making policy on top of the laws that exist, and some of those policies are
inhumane. They are expedient, they are
an attempt to frustrate and discourage people who cross the border without documentation,
but they are not all good policies. On top
of that the current President sends confusing signals to his own party, blaming
others for what his erratic and ambiguous leadership creates. Our Attorney General misapplies Scripture to
defend government as he falls into the same trap as the “Divine Right of Kings”
and disconnecting the creation of American law from the source of the greatness
of American history.
Americans appealed to a “higher” law to
resist the King who claimed that same Biblical authority. Abolitionists appealed to a “higher” law to
fight against legal but unjust slavery. Civil rights advocates violated state
laws of racial segregation based on a “higher law” of justice. Pro-life people appeal to a “higher” law to
resist abortion policies. Certainly some
laws are unjust and don’t deserve to be law, they need to be changed. In this case something weaker than law is
being fiercely defended by the Administration and that is simply expedient
policy to help meet a practical political goal.
I absolutely believe in obeying Romans 13,
but I see that text in the context of a nation “of the people, by the people,
and for the people.” We the people get
to choose our laws, and we get to choose our leaders, and we desperately in my
opinion need to choose to change the leaders we have unless they get to a
reality of justice, compassion, and wisdom, none of which they are exhibiting
at the moment.
If we detain families at the border they
should be kept intact and held together. This is not the
same as arrest for criminal activity where children are taken from parents by the state system Detainees don’t even get the rights of people
arrested in criminal cases such as quick hearings, adequate and provided legal
representation. If they are not applying
for asylum, if they have no good argument for seeking shelter here then we need
to send them home quickly, as families. If they are seeking asylum they should
not be treated as criminals in any way. All this money sought for a wall is nowhere as
needed as money needed for a good system of examination, decision, and
repatriation, with adequate provision for such families who are in that
process.
The President is correct that Congress needs
to act, but it obviously has a hard time doing so with such a mercurial
leader. he should stop making suggestions and then changing them, hoping for more political advantage. He needs to paint a picture of justice, one that he really believes in, and sell that to Congress and lead them toward it. Somebody needs to lead, and we
are a country desperately in need of one, a good one.