Illegal Immigration and the Bible

AAEAAQAAAAAAAAaTAAAAJGM0YjE5ZmZjLTU3NmYtNGM4Yy04ODI3LTg2ZDI1MTFkMjYwYwDanny Zucker is a producer and writer best known for the show “Modern Family.” Recently, he addressed Christians as a whole by saying that if they approved of Trump’s recent dismantling of Obama’s DACA legislation, their faith was garbage. He didn’t say, “garbage.” He was downright foul in what he had to say and he concluded his tweet with something even more crass. Click here to read his tweet.

Here’s the thing:

DACA is the “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” provision that Obama put into place that allows for children of illegal immigrants to remain in this country rather than be deported. On the surface, it may resonate as gracious and accommodating – especially given the fact that you’re talking about children that had no say in the way their parents chose to enter the country illegally.

But it’s more than minors.

Individuals are able to request DACA status if they were under the age of 31 on June 15, 2012, came to the U.S. before turning 16 and have continuously lived in the country since June 15, 2007. There’s about 800,000 people that fall under this category. 

On one hand, you’re drawn to the idea of almost a million innocent “dreamers” who want nothing more than to remain in this country and contribute as an honorable citizen. Mental images of crying children being separated from their parents, hardworking young adults being discharged from their jobs…

But on the other hand, you’ve got the stance of President Trump who said, “There can be no path to principled immigration reform if the executive branch is able to rewrite or nullify federal laws at will. The temporary implementation of DACA by the Obama administration, after Congress repeatedly rejected this amnesty-first approach, also helped spur a humanitarian crisis — the massive surge of unaccompanied minors from Central America including, in some cases, young people who would become members of violent gangs throughout our country, such as MS-13. Only by the reliable enforcement of immigration law can we produce safe communities, a robust middle class, and economic fairness for all Americans.”

Those like Zucker who disagree with Trump illustrate the problem represented by asking the wrong questions and inevitably arriving at all the wrong conclusions. However productive or sentimental the situation might appear to be, the fact of the matter is that those who were brought here illegally may not be guilty of breaking the law themselves, but they have nevertheless inherited the status of an illegal immigrant because of the criminal actions of their parents. Whatever indignation that is rightfully felt either by the offspring of those who entered the US illegally or those who would feel sorry for them, is valid only if it is directed towards the parents who put their children in this position in the first place and Barack Obama for ignoring the Constitution. Otherwise, you’re promoting a form of injustice and compromising what needs to be a strong immigration system. The question isn’t: “Is the situation not unfortunate?” The question is: “Are the parents guilty of breaking the law and putting their children in jeopardy?”

Donald Trump isn’t creating a problem. He’s rectifying a legal debacle created by his predecessor. DACA is a result of several Executive Orders that Obama authored back in 2012. And the problem isn’t Obama’s use of the Executive Order. Andrew McCarthy’s article in the National Review explains: “The problem is the substance of executive action. DACA is defective in two ways. First, it presumes to exercise legislative power by conferring positive legal benefits on a category of aliens (the “dreamers,” as concisely described in Yuval Levin’s Corner post). Second, it distorts the doctrine of prosecutorial discretion to rationalize this presidential legislating and to grant a de facto amnesty. These maneuvers violated core constitutional principles: separation of powers and the president’s duty to execute the laws faithfully.”1

Eligible to Vote: Obama Administration Allowed Thousands of DACA Recipients to Receive Green Cards, Leading to Citizenship

According to information released Friday by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, the Obama administration not only gave protection to millions of illegal immigrants through DACA, but also allowed DACA recipients to obtain green cards. As a green card holder, you’re now eligible to vote. It’s interesting to speculate how DACA can create a whole new crop of voters who are now, by default, inclined to vote for the Democrat party…

click here to read more

However penitent Obama should feel for putting the current president in the situation he’s in, you won’t see or hear any such remorse. If anything, you hear the all to familiar tactic he uses to minimize the Absolutes America is founded on by camouflaging injustice and political gain as “compassion.” Consider a recent post of his on  Facebook:

This is about young people who grew up in America – kids who study in our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides English. They often have no idea they’re undocumented until they apply for a job, or college, or a driver’s license.

He goes on to say:

What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most cherished values for the next generation. That’s how America has traveled this far. That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately reach that more perfect union.

At no time does he refer to anything pertaining to the rule of law. If you begin your journey as an American by demonstrating a lack of regard for its laws then you’re in violation of the Oath of Allegiance you’re required to agree to as part of becoming a citizen. That’s not being overly particular, that’s being just. And “compassion” extended in the absence of justice is nothing more than favoritism.

When Christ extends mercy to a sinner, He’s not ignoring the debt incurred by sin (Matt 6:12), He’s able to demonstrate compassion because He paid the debt of sin (1 Pet 3:18). Obama isn’t being generous or compassionate, he’s taking advantage of a situation that involves innocent parties and rather than holding those who are guilty of breaking the law accountable, he violates the Constitution, cheapens the value of authentic citizenship nad creates a security risk all the while cultivating a new crop of voters who are now positioned to vote for the Democrat party.

Zucker is a tragic figure in that he chooses to be a belligerent fool. Rather than using his platform to support a needed return to the rule of law and the elimination of the financial burden caused by illegals, instead he clings to a mindset that, like Barack Obama, says neither the Constitution nor the immigration process represents an absolute (click here to read how Obama has a real legacy when it comes to violating the Constitution). What they call “compassion” is nothing more than preferential treatment that is neither wise nor fair to those who bear the cost of those who come here illegally and the foreigners who honor American enough to obtain their citizenship properly and legally.

The Bible commands believers to abide by the rules of the land (1 Pet 2:13-17), not ignore them. Zucker would accuse Christians of possessing an illegitimate faith apart from supporting DACA, but his argument is flawed in that it’s not so much about giving people the opportunity to dream as much as it’s a strategic use of noble sounding verbiage used to camouflage a compromise of national security, an endorsement of financial irresponsibility and a dismissal of the Constitution. Given those kinds of dynamics, my refusing to applaud or support those who endorse DACA is not a violation of my faith, it’s an expression of it.

1. National Review, http://www.nationalreview.com/article/451071/donald-trump-daca-democrats-must-compromise, accessed September 7, 2016

Leave a Reply