home
RSS
July 14th, 2010
02:11 PM ET

Congress debates biblical stance on immigration

Congress tackled the role of religion and ethics in the politically explosive immigration debate Wednesday as biblical passages and church doctrines were invoked during a heated discussion of various reform proposals.

The argument exposed a sharp philosophical divide on an issue that has taken center stage in the wake of Arizona's passage of a controversial law designed to crack down on illegal immigration.

"We are so far apart philosophically," one Democratic congresswoman said, that it's hard to see how a middle ground can be found.

The debate occurred during a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing featuring Richard Land, a leader of the Southern Baptist Convention; Bishop Gerald Kicanas from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops; Mathew Staver, dean of the Liberty University law school; and James Edwards Jr., a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies.

"Immigration is ultimately a humanitarian issue since it impacts the basic rights and dignity of millions of persons and their families," Kicanas said. "As such, it has moral implications, especially how it impacts the basic survival and decency of life experienced by human beings like us. ... Our current immigration system fails to meet the moral test of protecting the basic rights and dignity of the human person."

Kicanas, who is bishop of the Catholic archdiocese in Tucson, Arizona, noted that thousands of men, women and children have died in the desert over the past decade trying to cross from Mexico into the United States.

The current law has to be changed, he said. "Because of a broken system, immigrant families are being separated. Migrant workers are subject to
exploitation by unscrupulous employers, and those attempting to find work by
coming north are being abused and taken advantage of by human smugglers."

Most illegal migrants are coming "not for nefarious purposes," but to reconnect with family members or find work, he asserted. "Church teaching acknowledges and upholds the right of a nation to control its borders. (But) it is our view that the best way to secure our southern border is through (comprehensive) immigration reform."

But Texas Rep. Lamar Smith, the Judiciary Committee's top Republican, repeatedly cited passages from the Bible in support of a stronger crackdown on illegal immigration.

"The Bible contains numerous passages that support the rule of law," he asserted. "The scriptures clearly indicate that God charges civil authorities
with preserving order, protecting citizens and punishing wrongdoers."

Smith cited, among other things, Romans 13: "Let every person be subject to governing authorities."

He also noted a passage from Leviticus: "When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong." This, he contended, does not imply that "foreigners should disregard civil laws to enter (the country) or that we should overlook it when they do."

Addressing a passage from Matthew 25 about caring for "the least of these my brothers," Smith contended that it "advocates individual acts of kindness (but) does not mandate a public policy."

"Americans need not repent for wanting to uphold the rule of law and provide jobs for legal workers," he said. "A truly Christian moral approach would be not to acquiesce to illegal immigration, but to work to end it."

Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Illinois, argued that the government is fundamentally "a reflection of who we are," and that there should therefore be little distinction between individual and governmental roles.

"Focus on (the undocumented) families" at the center of the debate, he said. "Let's focus on the human beings."

Iowa GOP Rep. Steve King, however, complained that for many reform advocates the only "biblically acceptable option ... seems to be open borders."

"I didn't realize that the Bible barred the enforcement of immigration laws and neither did I realize that it erased borders, demanded pathways to citizenship for illegal immigrants, or ... forbid the leaders of a nation from caring most about the well-being of its own citizens."

King noted approvingly that "in the land of the Bible the leaders of today's Israel (have) built border fences to protect their citizens from terrorists or illegal job seekers alike."

There is a "greater and more immediate" moral obligation to take care of
U.S. citizens first, he said.

Land asserted that while "we have a crisis," it is not insurmountable.

"I believe that Congress can and should devise a plan to bring (illegal immigrants) out of the shadows. The more protracted the delay in action the more severe the problem will become." Arizona's law is a "symptom" and a "cry for help ... because the federal government has not done its duty" to control the border.

"Some people would argue that it's immoral to enforce our nation's laws," he argued. "I don't think it's fair and I don't think it's right." But once the border is secured, "I believe we have to have a six- to nine-month grace period for people who are here in an undocumented status to come forward, to register, to agree to pay fines, to pay back taxes, to undergo a background check, to learn to read, write (and) speak English, to pass a test that they've done so, and (to) go to the back of the line so that they are not being rewarded."

Turning to conservative critics of the current reform effort, Land said that he does "not believe that you can strain the English language into saying that is amnesty."

CNN's Alan Silverleib and the CNN Wire Staff contributed to this report

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Politics

soundoff (624 Responses)
  1. Dan

    Please vote out any politician that starts quoting the bible when trying to decide a law. This is absurd.

    July 14, 2010 at 8:29 pm |
    • Barry

      Thank you also Dan

      "Man will not be free until the last king (politician) is strangled on the entrails of the last priest."–Deidrot

      "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction". –Blaise Pascal 1623-1662

      "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."— James Madison – chief architect of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights

      July 15, 2010 at 12:41 am |
  2. Loren

    Can we *please* get the Bible out of a political debate? The First Amendment said that Congress shall make no laws regarding establishment of religion.

    If people want to live under a religious government, they can move to Iran.

    July 14, 2010 at 8:27 pm |
    • Katherine Riebe

      Well-stated, Loren. The U.S. Constitution was written in such a way to help guide this Nation. Religious arguments ought to not be apart of this immigration issue we are facing in the 21st century. Also, as many educated persons would know there are freedoms of choice to not practice religion whatsoever. Our Fore Fathers, to name a few, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and the rest, I think would be ashamed to hear that the U.S. Congress have brought religious beliefs to the tables in regards to this immigration issue. This is a legal and economic issue in a political science realm, if you will, and many of our Laws of the Land have been created via legal and political (and on philosophical grounds). With this in mind, I would like to hope that Congress and the State of Arizona can find ways to (1) have reasonable measures to help legalize immigrants who are currently here to become U.S. Citizens. After all, they will help our overall economic situation with increase revenue and tax revenue; and (2) create some kind of border system when we create more jobs for security, yet at the same time, make sure those who are coming into our country do use the "front door". That shows courtesy for our country and the people who have lived here legally. The system needs improvement that's all.

      July 14, 2010 at 10:53 pm |
    • Barry

      THANK YOU LOREN!!!!

      "When Fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."–Sinclair Lewis

      July 15, 2010 at 12:38 am |
    • Jason

      Both of you have it wrong. The amendment has nothing to do with excluding religious ideas, instead it deals primarily with not forcing people to worship/believe in a "official" government religion. For many the only basis for a moral code is the Bible, and to force them to exclude those ideas is silly. The government should not enforce Bible laws, but our representatives can use the morals found in the Bible to guide them in crafting a law that meets the needs of the people. The Bible supporting the rule of law and the love of people don't sound like horrible concepts now do they? I don't think we can go wrong by considering both of those points. However, I don't think the Bible will solve this debate, because the Bible focuses on individual's actions and the story of salvation, more than how a government should handle their affairs.

      July 15, 2010 at 1:00 am |
    • Dave Lawson

      Sorry, Jason, you have it wrong also. I do NOT pretend to be an expert, but the first amendment is normally referred to as "separation of church and state" (per the Bible, BTW). In other words, citizens of the U.S. may apply any morals that they desire as a part of their decision, but do not institute legislation because "the Bible says so." I AM a Christian (by Jesus' definition). I do NOT want politicians inappropriately throwing out single, isolated quotations, as another previous comment said. Politicians, in PARTICULAR, do not tell me what the Bible says! In fact, I'm Protestant, meaning that NO ONE tells me what the Bible says! That's MY responsibility! However, I agree with the part about the Bible not providing instructions to Government. "Give unto Caesar.." I'd screw up the quote if I continued).

      July 15, 2010 at 2:20 am |
  3. Dan

    What in the world does the bible have to do with anything?!?!?

    July 14, 2010 at 8:27 pm |
  4. Wake-Up

    HelsGod: what is a real crime to you? To the rest of the world it is someone that breaks the law. So now we have GOOD criminals, Not so Bad criminals, Criminals, and really bad criminals? In the Bible a sin is a sin. There is no such thing as a not so bad sin. You say you are a Christian?

    July 14, 2010 at 8:23 pm |
    • HopesforGood

      I think you should read more. Not everything is like you expect. Understand your versus.

      July 14, 2010 at 8:39 pm |
  5. R

    The problem with the "obey the law" types is they for some reason pretend like our current laws are god's truth and, as such, shouldn't be changed, ever, for any reason.

    July 14, 2010 at 8:17 pm |
  6. vel

    The bible says it's okay to have slaves. Not one word against it. It tells slaves to just suck it up and even obey cruel masters. Seems exactly what many "good christians" do when they hire illegals. The only thing that one might invoke is when Jesus says "what you do to the least of these, you do to me". But far be it for many "right wing" Chrisitans to actually remember that part. they think that Jesus is all about them getting wealthy, not that Jesus says that one should abandon all of their belongings and follow him.

    July 14, 2010 at 8:17 pm |
    • Wesley Pittman

      Our country was established for religious freedom against the Catholic Church and the Church of England. The founding fathers were of a mind for our nation to be one of liberty, freedom and the right of the nation to worship as they see fit. Most of the founding fathers were Deists and real Christians. Yes, even Thomas Jefferson, loved the Bible as well as all of the signers of the Declaration of Independence. Our forefathers died, shed their blood, and gave there lives so that we might have a nation for the people, by the people, that shall not perish from the earth. Every American, Congressman, etc. has a right to discuss, debate, and perform Christian duties in this nation. Since the founding of our nation, they have used the Bible as the key source for our laws of the land. It is written all over Washington, D.C. To the Atheist who doesn't believe in God, "Lift up your eyes, and look unto the heavens and be ye saved, all ye ends of the earth." To the Catholic who believes in the worship of Mary and the saints, "Look unto Jesus and be ye saved." To the Muslim, "Jesus said, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man cometh unto the Father except by me." I thank God that we elected these men to office who are willing to use the Bible as their law book and not some book by Thomas Paine who was a horrible man who is now burning in Hell.

      Now to the point on Immigration. Our nation was founded so that all may enter freely and on their own free will. I believe that Congress should pass immigration reform and that our borders should be secured. All states should pass their own immigration laws similar to Arizona. Down with the federal government's (Obama's Administration) ways of thinking and up with the morals, principles, and guidelines of the Constitution of the USA.

      Remember, "a nation divided against itself cannot stand." If Congress can use the Bible as their law book, then it is high time that the school system be able to use ONCE AGAIN as the textbook. AMEN!

      July 15, 2010 at 1:15 am |
  7. HeIsGod

    As a Christian, I do believe that the law of the land should be followed as stated in the Bible, but also, those that already hear shouldn't be treated harshly as many people have accused all of them as real criminals that needs to be in prison. Now, in my opinion, those illegals that have been here longer than 15 years should receive a Residential Green card that will allow them to be here for 10 years and renew their green card every 10 years. The US would be making $$ by renewing it. Also, I think it be a good idea that they have one without allowing them to become a US citizens. Many of them don't want the Citizenship, they want to be able to have a permit in order to be here and travel to Mexico to see their love-ones.

    July 14, 2010 at 8:03 pm |
    • Mike Speakman

      Those illegal immigrants that you want to give green cards to are bleeding us dry slowing but surely. They send a large percentage of what they make back to Mexico hurting our economy to the benifit of Mexicos economy. Deport them all when found. Nothing short of an extremely high fine is acceptable for them to remain here, otherwise it's just another amnesty.

      July 14, 2010 at 9:59 pm |
    • HeIsGod

      @ Mike Speakman- That isn't true! No disrespect, but I know many Mexicans that have seasonal jobs and they have to support themselves and their family and you act as if they get paid more than an American with a college degree. These people can not send lumps of $$ because of their seasonal jobs. You can seat there and whine and complain all you want, they will not be deported!

      July 14, 2010 at 11:29 pm |
  8. Jose

    This is what War Veteran wrote people and he is right.

    (Wow, I am a soldier in the US Army and I am horrified to see how some Americans have become. We serve in your Armies which is more then what I can say for most of you who complain about other using welfare when there are Americans who dont pay taxes and use welfare, idiot.

    whats scary about this is I saw this happen in Iraq, Insurgents passed out flyers and told people to leave if they were not of that group, some what similar in this action.

    I agree that some illegal immigrants should be kicked out of dodge like the criminal ones for sure, but people we have soldiers who have family or parents who dont have papers but gave up son to serve in your Army.

    Who are terrorist now? blame minorities, the American way, this must be how Native Americans felt about white people.

    Native American people where are you? These selfish Americans are trying to kick people out, is that not funny to you or what?

    Sure I was an illegal once and now in the Army, at least I can say I earned my citizenship, what have you done for your country besides selfishness and ignorance?

    Not racist just selfish.)

    July 14, 2010 at 7:15 pm |
    • HeIsGod

      Well said, Jose!

      July 14, 2010 at 8:15 pm |
    • Wake-Up

      I am Veteran to. I fought for MY country to protect its people and its law. Try fighting for your own country and maybe it will be worth living in.

      July 14, 2010 at 8:28 pm |
    • Mike Speakman

      Well as a retired mililtary person myself, I have to ask what program did you use to join the military? There are programs where citizens of certain allied nations can join our armed forces and earn their citizenship legally. However I suspect that if you were here illegally then you took an underhanded route and should be court martialed for it then deported. Illegal is illegal, working the system with falsified paperwork only compounds your crimes.

      July 14, 2010 at 10:07 pm |
    • Dave Lawson

      I feel the need to add to Mike Speakman's comments, although they're quite good on their own. I am absolutely baffled by the notion that flyers telling people of different ideologies to leave clan territory has anything whatever to do with illegal immigration! This is the U.S.! An approximation is "I do not agree, but I will defend to the death your right to state your position" (I don't want to take the time to research). The U.S. WELCOMES different ideologies, that difference gives us our strength! However, people who feel that their opinion overrides the law should flat leave, NOW! Folks, illegal immigration is not the most arrogant, self-centered, selfish position ever taken, but it's definitely in the running! Oh, by the way, is the millions per year spent on illegal health care less than the cost of assembling trucks to deport? Enquiring minds want to know!

      July 15, 2010 at 2:01 am |
  9. news3000

    Actually, God did not blow it when he was creating Lamar Smith's and Steve King's racists minds, hearts, and souls. Hate is a learning behavior. What is shameful is that they are teaching this hatre' anomality way of thinking to young Americans. Thank God that Americans know better.

    July 14, 2010 at 7:06 pm |
  10. news3000

    Lamar Smith and Steve King are known racists so what can you expect from those evil animals? Nothing, good. Using the Biblie to further express their hate. That's sick and low. God must be thinking " I thought I was perfect, but I really blew it with their building their mind, heart, and soul." Lamar Smith should give to the poor his $40,000,000, now, that he does not want to vote for unemployment beneficies. Steve King should cleanse his racist tongue.

    July 14, 2010 at 6:55 pm |
    • peace2all

      @news3000....... Not sure what both of your posts have to do with the securing of our U.S. borders and illegal immigration....?

      July 14, 2010 at 7:19 pm |
  11. TerryG

    Give me a break!!!! This is not a religious problem but a legal and national security problem. Secure the borders, enforce immigration laws, and do it now.

    July 14, 2010 at 6:45 pm |
  12. descent

    the country is falling apart at the seams, and these idiots are trying to decide which belief system will support their position. give me a break. If congress wants to adopt an illegal, then each of the 100 senators and 435 representatives can feel free to do so - using the millions of dollars they have stolen from the American people. HEY! Congress – you know who you are – do your job and stop raping US CITIZENS. Stop the free ride for churches and get the whole religious delusion out of any and enforcement of the law. You [congress] do remember the law don't you?

    July 14, 2010 at 5:58 pm |
  13. No God Needed

    You only need to decide who runs the country. Americans or Illegals. If you are here illegally then you are subject to the laws already in place and should expect to get kicked out. What the Bible has to do with it is beyond comprehension.

    July 14, 2010 at 5:42 pm |
  14. Joseph

    I simply do not believe that Democrats want the Right's ideas. They know what they want to do; they simply want three RINOs to cross the aisle to help them

    You have the votes, Mr. Obama, do what you want. reap the whirlwind in November.

    July 14, 2010 at 5:38 pm |
  15. ProudTexan

    I can only say the following words with regards to my own personal experience in Arizona. My father was taken out of his personal vehicle in, beaten severely by local law inforcement in AZ. He was scheduled to be deported to Mexico (our Native American background has given him dark skin tones). In fact, my family has been in the U.S., or what would become the U.S., since 1750. I can see this law being passed as giving the AZ law enforcement the power to treat anyone, who is not pale white, including tanned caucasians, as they wish. I have no disagreement with controlling illegal immigration. However, i do have a problem with putting that much power in the hands of AZ law enforcement. They are not capable of handling this much power and cannot be trusted!

    July 14, 2010 at 5:38 pm |
    • XWngLady

      I'm sorry to hear about your father. Unfortunately, those who support this AZ law would say to you that this kind of thing won't happen because the officer's are being "trained' not to discriminate....yeah right.

      July 14, 2010 at 6:22 pm |
  16. ChristianBeliever

    The bible nor christian beliefs have no place in politics whatsoever.

    July 14, 2010 at 5:22 pm |
    • Kurt

      Perhaps not. Render until Caesar and all that. But at an individual level can we call ourselves believers in some version of God on one hand and then ignore those beliefs as a citizen – we have values or we do not.

      July 14, 2010 at 5:36 pm |
    • Reality

      Kurt, "But at an individual level can we call ourselves believers in some version of God" We do????? References to substanstiate we are all believers in some version of god??

      July 14, 2010 at 5:43 pm |
    • Dan

      Kurt, I don't believe in mythology.

      July 14, 2010 at 8:33 pm |
    • Dave Lawson

      Kurt, I DO believe in "mythology," but you appear to be treading the same shaky floor that you've used before. In fact, there's no scriptural basis for stating that you hve to do good toward everyone. That's an interpretation, and it's intended to show an improvement path. As I said before, we can't help everyone, and there is absolutely nothing in scripture to tell you to put yourself completely out of work to help others.Instead, it says that you give until it hurts. The question is whether individuals can decide that they should be helped before all others by placing themselves into this illegal position, or if we have the right and responsibility to choose based on our principles. As USAFSam said, we have, and retain, the right to insist that persons coming to this country meet requirements. I know of no other country in the world that follows any other policy, and I think that suggestions to the contrary are pure bunk (look it up). The irony is, increasing illegal citizenry most likely will NOT help the Democratic party!

      July 15, 2010 at 1:48 am |
  17. chris brownfl

    I believe that is religion is the root problem here. the catholic church has had there foot in the door down there for 4 hundred years selling there brand of religion. in particular no birth control. they are so over crowded that they have no choice but to immigrate. this is great for the catholic church never ending supply of donations. Do the math 8 kids times 8 generations pretty good income. Trouble is the jobs are not keeping up. the work place i am in see tons of south of the boders but i never see any old ones.

    July 14, 2010 at 5:22 pm |
    • Kurt

      that's a rather sweeping generalization to suggest that every Mexican has 8 children - some would call it racism. I just call it an exaggerated stereotype. Whatever you call it, it doesn't really help anything.

      July 14, 2010 at 5:29 pm |
  18. Kurt

    @Georgia from PA. It's a race issue not because of illegals. It's a race issue because it potential profiles and threatens the 4th amendment freedoms of hispanic citizens. 30% of AZ citizens are hispanic. 15% of the entire nation are hispanic. The AZ law is too broad (it allows infraction of local ordinances to be used as criteria ) - situation: a hispanic woman is driving her 4 kids somewhere in AZ, she`s in a clunker and gets stopped for a broken tail light. You do not know if she is a citizen or not. Do you insist on seeing her citizenship papers? If she has none with her- like a citizen does NOT require such papers and a DL is not proof – what do you do? this is the concern... and frankly, AZ has a long history of racial intolerance toward hispanics.

    July 14, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
    • John

      Kurt,
      There has been a Federal Law on the books for decades that requires all American citizens to carry proper identification...and that same law provides for the detention of anyone who cannot provide it. Would you feel better if everyone was required to provide proof of citizenship every time they broke a law? I wouldn't have a problem with that...I'm not a lawbreaker...but then you wouldn't be able to call it racist either. (Unless of course you are not talking about prejudice a race but prejudice against law breakers).

      July 15, 2010 at 12:21 am |
  19. Georgia from PA

    How dis illegally obtaining access to a country during a major recession, and two wars become a race issue? Oh! That's right if someone can't win a legal argument then throw the race card that should lead to hysterics coming out of the woodwork. We have a sovereign nation and I am pretty much a liberal, but being a veteran I wish to keep this nation sovereign and safe – we have enough problems losing a quarter of our country to an oil gusher and a realistic unemployment rate of 20% when adding in under the table jobs and bartering. Keep ILLEGALS (all of them, white, black, yellow and purple) OUT

    July 14, 2010 at 5:09 pm |
  20. Kurt Lynn

    Well Striker, being a conservative Canadian puts you still to the left of Obama and most left Americans are to the right of Steve Harper. Your comments seem to support this. Like you I do believe the issue is politically motivated – AZ, for example, has no prayer in trying to add any value in enforcement – Jan Brewer's bill was not accompanied by a budget and the entire state budget of AZ a fraction of the federal border protection budget. Corporate America (and by that I think you mean large corporations) couldn't care less about the immigration bill. If it is significant to them, they will simply put a plant in Mexico or Canada as the economics dictate. Morever, large corporations have a high likelihood of doing business with the government and hence are required to use e-Verify for new hires. To your third point, there is globalist issue at stake, I agree, but most right-wing calls to SECURE THE BORDER are ignorant of existing treaties (including Migrant Worker Act), and tourism. You know yourself what a stink it was when passport control went into place between Canada and the U.S. And, we should keep in mind that most 9/11 terrorists were in the U.S. under legal visas. so....? Lastly, the same right wingers that want less government seem, somehow, at the same time to want more. Who is going to police the hiring of companies? Who is going to somehow send all illegals home?
    The essence of politics (and I'm no politician nor have the temperament for it) is the art of the possible – i.e. pragmatism. The U.S. has an estimated 12 million illegals in the country (only a small portion of those are actually in AZ leading us to believe that it's political) and there is no viable nor inexpensive way to rid the country of them - by roughly doubling the existing border patrol (and their $50 billion budget) we could probably find and deport the illegals. But we would also be deporting their sales tax payments, their excise payments, their gas payments and a large portion of the tax contribution of some 8 million SSN card holders who are probably illegal and cannot file for refunds and yet still have FICA and income deductdions. The consequences are not insignificant.
    To your point of the implosion – and to our friend Thomas Paine – the real implosion from where I sit, is that Americans would so easily overlook and abandon our 4th amendment freedoms because of their temporary, expedient xenophobia (which buy the way often includes Canadians). For example, under the AZ law which has catalyzed such attention, when a hispanic woman driving in AZ with a NM license, in an old clunker, with 4 kids gets stopped – and recognizing that 30% of the southwest population of CITIZENS are hispanic in origin – should the police be allowed to demand proof of citizenship? What happens to her rights if she is a citizen (and u.s. citizens, like Canadians, are NOT required to carry proof of citizenship at all times and a DL is NOT proof).

    July 14, 2010 at 5:07 pm |
    • striker

      Well Kurt, there is one thing I do apologize for and that is the spelling of your great thinker and nation builder Thomas Paine.Sorry! I very firmly however reaffirm my position on the three theories which I have postulated for you on immigration. As well , you somewhat digress with your Kurt {pardon the pun} diatribe of my political leanings as it relates to yours or my political spectrum. I am well aware of some of the policies which have been undertaken by Mr. Obama and Mr. Harper . I can assure you that my" common sense" approach to politics and it's self interests would not bode well with either leader. I once again assert it is not the right that is inflaming this issue but rather a left that has little interest in the good of the republic but only seeks to promote a self serving globe of an individual based left leaning festering feldercarb!
      God Speed
      Striker

      Striker

      July 14, 2010 at 7:37 pm |
    • usafsam

      Kurt I disagree with you.... The USA has rounded up the illegals more than once. Illegal Alien is not a race so shut up about that. This is a legal issue. I support SB 1070 and AZ and all the other 20 states heading up the same path to enact their own laws as is their 10th Amendment right. The Federal Law is the one that insists all law enforcement across the nation validate ID when stopping a person. As a USA citizen I show my ID many times during my week and that is not even to law enforcement. THe Federal law is what states you can not hire, rent or sell to an illegal. THe Federal law is what gives us the right to sue even churches for providing sanctuary to illegals... Federal Immigration and Nationality Act
      Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)

      WE have a right to select who and how many are allowed to enter this nation based on economic and cultural situations. WE must insist that those who enter have abided by all laws, had all medical checks accomplished, and come ONLY when given permission. We must also insist that they assimilate & become loyal solely to the USA : as Theodore Roosevelt said

      We should insist that if the immigrant who comes here does in good faith become an American and assimilates himself to us he shall be treated on an exact equality with every one else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed or birth-place or origin.

      But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American and nothing but an American. If he tries to keep segregated with men of his own origin and separated from the rest of America, then he isn't doing his part as an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. . . We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language, for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, of American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding-house; and we have room for but one soul loyalty, and that is loyalty to the American people.

      July 15, 2010 at 12:35 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.