Who Would Jesus Deport?: For the Christian, Immigration Isn’t About Politics or Economics

wwjd.001
WWJD? Who Would Jesus Deport?

I am raising my voice in opposition to the prospect of the United States Government rounding up and deporting millions of our neighbors because they do not have legal immigration status. I’m doing so as a Christian and as a pastor. Because, for the Christian, immigration isn’t about politics or economics. Immigration is a matter of hospitality, and a matter of adhering to the teachings of the Bible.

The Christian scriptures insist upon love as a way of life. Hospitality isn’t optional, it’s an essential Christian posture. Our faith hinges on two great commands: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’… ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'” (Mark 12:30-31). The link between the two is telling. One cannot love God and refuse to love a neighbor.

So, who is my neighbor? One of Jesus’ most famous stories addressed this question. A Jewish man was attacked by robbers and left for dead by the side of the road. Two good Jewish leaders, a priest and a Levite, passed the man without helping. Then the hated foreigner, a Samaritan, stopped and cared for the man, treating his wounds and helping to pay his medical costs, proving himself to be the true neighbor.

Those who first heard the parable got the point: stop considering the Samaritans as unworthy of being your neighbor. If Jesus were telling the story today, I think the Samaritan would be from Mexico or Syria. For contemporary readers the point is equally stark: stop considering immigration status when it comes to deciding who is your neighbor. One could say it more pointedly: you are not a good neighbor when you call for your neighbor to be deported. You are a neighbor when you stand with them and ask that they be included in the community.

When the Christian is faced with the prospect of mass deportations, politics and economics should go out the window. This is a matter of hospitality, and friendship. It’s a matter of discipleship and obedience.

I’ve heard the objections. “The illegal immigrants aren’t my neighbors. They’re not even supposed to be here.” Again, if we say this we are on tenuous ground, because the Bible contains an explicit command on the matter: “When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.” (Leviticus 19:33-34).

There’s no wiggle room on this issue. As a Christian, you are required to love the alien (legal or not) as yourself. The alien who resides with you should be treated like a citizen. Why? Because God’s people were aliens at one time. And so were your people. Translation: you are no better than the illegal alien. If you are not a Native American, then your people were aliens in the land of America at one time. Your lack of hospitality for the alien among you is an insult to the memory of your family, and your church heritage. It is offensive to God when his own people, who were once strangers in a strange land, support the politician’s plans to deport millions of strangers living among us.

Opposing mass deportation is not only a matter of hospitality, it’s a matter of faith. Do we not believe that if we show radical hospitality to the strangers among us who do not have legal status, that God will have our backs? Do we think God will not take care of us when we do the right thing? Do we think God is as small and petty as the politicians? Surely we can have enough faith to believe that if we are generous with our immigrant friends, they will be generous toward us as well, and God even all the more generous with us all?

On the other hand, what is the price tag if we get this wrong? Jesus promises to judge the nations one day. You know what the criteria is? “For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me.” (Matthew 25:35)

I was a stranger… and you welcomed me. That’s how you know whose future lies with God, and whose isn’t. And not for nothing, but if your only excuse is “they are illegals,” Then read the passage carefully. Because the prisoner is supposed to get the same kind of hospitality.

Who would Jesus deport? Seriously? Can you see Jesus standing with Kris Kobach and Donald Trump on this issue? I don’t see it.

Standing with our immigrant neighbors is a matter of faith. Whatever your objections to hospitality toward immigrants (legal or not), the Christian is not motivated by self-interest or fear, nor is the Christian meant to be in league with the government when the government is acting unjustly. The Christian is motivated by hospitality, and a willingness to follow Jesus no matter what.

Immigration reform is long overdue. And there are many complicated issues that need to be discussed and decided. But this one is simple. This one is addressed over and over in the bible. This one is not ambiguous. “You shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt.” And just in case you didn’t get how serious God is about this command, God left an official stamp on the end of the passage: “I am the Lord your God.” It was God’s way of saying, don’t mess with me on this one. Just do it.

"like my Aunt Paula says -- You're a long time in the tomb, so while ..."

Fleecing the Flock: A Snapshot of ..."
"Interesting. Democracy is a more just system than the alternatives. But it does put everyone ..."

Stanley Hauerwas: A Prayer on Election ..."
""The music is just so dang good we cant stop listening"???? Lmao"

How Has Pop Music Really Gotten ..."
"I'd be interested in hearing a followup on this now that it's been a few ..."

The Beauty of the Midlife Crisis: ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Jon-Michael Ivey

    Modern immigration laws are pretty much equivalent of the Fugitive Slave acts of the 19th century. From a biblical and legal perspective, they are frankly even more dubious.

    • LovingConservative

      In what way are they equivalent?

  • scott stone

    Totally agree with your biblical assessment of loving the alien, legal or not. My question is what are we to do? I don’t have an answer but I’m tired of hearing the same talking point, “We need comprehensive immigration reform.” Ok, what the hell does that mean? We need to construct some type of system that works for the country in the aggregate. An open borders policy is not a solution and deporting 12m is not even doable, let alone moral. We need to make sure 20 years down the road we aren’t in the same place as we are today.
    I’m soon to be an expat and I wonder if people realize how difficult it is to obtain residency in other countries. Controlling our borders and the flow of people into our country isn’t an evil proposition. This is another area where the conversation is dominated by the extremes on both ends.
    Not to be snarky and maybe I’ve missed previous posts but, where the hell have you been the last 8 years? “I am raising my voice in opposition to the prospect of the United States Government rounding up and deporting millions of our neighbors because they do not have legal immigration status.” The Obama administration has been tossing people out at record numbers. I know Trump brags bout what he’s going to do (here’s a little secret. He’s not going to do squat!) and that’s got folks up in arms, but the current Prez is the deporter in chief.

  • LovingConservative

    Does the brother lock his door at night or leave it open to invite anyone into his home? Doesn’t the hospitality called for in Scripture start with the individual believer? Where does the Scripture say this requirement extends to the government?

    • Iain Lovejoy

      Did you vote for the man who said he would do this, and will you lift a finger to protest when it is done?

      • LovingConservative

        Who I voted for is not really your business or the issue here. The author essentially is making an argument the Christ would have supported open borders because of hospitality. I just wanted to know if he practices this at the individual level, because Christ wants to impact the individual and in that way impact society. His commands are to each of us who claim Him as Lord and Savior and less to forcibly change culture through political action. There are laws that regulate how persons come into countries, and as Christians, we are called to obey those laws so long as they do not require us to disobey a command from God, and God did not command us to have open borders.

        • Iain Lovejoy

          Your argument was that it was OK to eject foreigners as long as it was the government doing it, not individuals, apparently in the basis that Christians ought to abide bt the law. This doesn’t work, however, in a democracy if you are voting for leaders running on a platform of rejecting those same foreigners.
          And, as the article points out, the obligation to welcome foreigners and exiles into our midst is a repeated express command in the OT, and they are included in the “neighbours” Jesus calls on us to love.
          You may think God’s commands naive, or too hard to follow, for all sorts of eminently practical reasons, but to welcome strangers, foreigners and exiles into our communities is exactly what he has expressly commanded.

          • LovingConservative

            Again, there is that tip-toe around my question – do you lock your door at night? If so, why? If someone broke into your house and decided to live there would you be ok with that? Would it be inhospitable or unloving to call the police to have them removed?
            For the Christian, we are to be hospitable and loving to the strangers amongst us, and if you interpret this as opposing the deportation of people who have come to this land illegally, why have you not protested deportations now or for the last four, eight, ten, etc. years?
            The answer is because this is raised not as a spiritual or doctrinal issue but a political one under the guise of about being a Christian

          • Iain Lovejoy

            Actually I’m British so I can’t sensibly be accused of playing American party politics, and while I confess I have not been on marches and demonstrations I have in a small way tried to support those at, for example, my church, helping assist those threatened with deportation, have not supported anti-immigration parties and voted against the (anti-immigration) Brexit proposals.
            Yes, I do lock my door when I go out, but I don’t actually think that foreigners are thieves or squatters but fellow human beings and my neighbours who I am called upon to love. I would expect a foreign person living here to contribute to society just like everyone else, because that is what God expressly commands us to do: to apply the same rules to the stranger and foreigner as we apply to ourselves.

          • LovingConservative

            So you lock your door to protect your possessions. If someone were to break in without your permission, you would have the police come and remove them, even if they had not stolen. You might welcome them to stay, if you determined they had good reason, but in most cases you would have them removed. Immigration laws are the door to come in to a country. Break that door and there are consequences. That is not unloving nor inhospitable to require someone to obey a law.

          • Iain Lovejoy

            Again with the “immigrants are thieves” line. They are not. And once again you don’t get to hide behind the law in a democracy where you vote for the people making the laws. Your view ses to be it’s fine to support the throwing out of foreigners if the government does it for you.

          • LovingConservative

            I see it fine for throwing people out of the country when they have broken the law for coming into the country, just like I see it as fine if a person comes into my house without my permission and decides to live there. This is not calling “immigrants are thieves”, Why do you lump legal immigrants with those who are here illegally? Clearly there is a difference.
            It is not inhospitable or unloving to require someone to follow the rules. If an immigrant is here legally, then we should be hospitable and loving, but if they came in illegally, by breaking the immigration law, then they should face those consequences.
            If you allow someone to move into your home that is fine, but if someone comes in without your permission, you are not being inhospitable nor unloving to have that person removed.

          • Iain Lovejoy

            If you refuse to invite the foreigner and traveller into your house in the first place that is inhospitable and unloving (and against God’s express commands).

          • LovingConservative

            So are you saying that there should not be Immigration Laws in the first place? That anyone who wishes to come to England or the US should be allowed because otherwise it is inhospitable?

          • Iain Lovejoy

            If they pay their own way, behave themselves and there is work for them to do or they otherwise contribute to society then yes.

          • LovingConservative

            If they don’t behave themselves (I kike how you British phrase things), work, or contribute then what, deportation?

          • LovingConservative

            Sorry, meant ‘like’, not ‘kike’ – that has a whole different meaning.

          • Iain Lovejoy

            Yup, I’ve no problem with that. It is different if someone is a refugee who can’t go back home if things don’t work out because of war or persecution, but the principle responsibility for looking after their citizens who can’t earn themselves a living should be their home country. That is not to say that I don’t think richer countries shouldn’t be involved in international aid for poorer countries, but that is a different issue. Likewise, countries should have to deal with their own criminals and not export them elsewhere, and if a foreign citizen commits a serious crime or is a persistent petty criminal they should be sent home for their home state to sort out what to do with them (I don’t suggest deporting people for e.g. littering).
            The case is different where someone has been living peaceably in the country for years without a problem, or is naturalised, or came in as a child, and no longer has a home in their home country to go back to – under those circumstances deportation would seem wholly disproportionate, and I can’t see why someone who has already been living in my country for years and contributing taxes etc should not get the same state support as anyone else if things later go wrong.

          • LovingConservative

            Not to put words in your mouth, but that sounds very close to an advocacy for a global community rather than nations – i.e. that there would be no borders between countries. Is that correct?

          • Iain Lovejoy

            Not really. The European Union has had exactly this freedom of movement of people between nations (more so in fact) for the last 40 years, and we are all still separate nations.

          • siglavy auerga

            and now look what is happening in Germany with the ‘rapidemic”.

          • Iain Lovejoy
          • siglavy auerga

            Mr. Lovejoy, thank you for the reference to tht newspaper story. Did you read the comments beneath it,especially the firs five or six of them?

          • Iain Lovejoy

            No, because there aren’t any, at least in the mobile version of the page I am looking at.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Very much agree with your well thought out post.

          • Snooterpoot

            I don’t see any love in you at all, “Loving” Conservative.

          • LovingConservative

            Wow, that statement was both judgmental (about me) and pretty inhospitable (according to the theology indicated in this article), but I have to ask, what did I say that led you to that conclusion?

          • Snooterpoot

            Yes, it is judgmental. But I don’t think it’s inhospitable considering the fact that you apparently fail to see undocumented immigrants (or “illegals” as many people with your belief seem to call them) as human beings who need help.

            You’ve talked about leaving your door open so thieves can come in and steal all of your stuff as if it applies to this situation. Well, it doesn’t. It’s a different thing altogether.

            Leviticus 19 33-34

            33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him.
            34 But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

            and

            Matthew 25:35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
            36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
            37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
            38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
            39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
            40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

            I don’t see any wiggle room there.

          • LovingConservative

            Again what I said is misrepresented. I never said ‘thieves’ I said people coming into your house to live. I never said they come in to steal anything, just to live. Hey, maybe they are even working outside the home and paying for the food eaten and helping with the mortgage payment. The point is you did not invite them in, they just came in. It is amazing how people fail to read the analogy.
            As for those verses, yes we are to be hospitable and kind to others, but it is not inhospitable to ask them obey the laws of the land, and if they break that law then they face the consequences. We are also to be fair, and allowing some to stay because they broke the law, while others are not allowed in yet, is promoting an injustice to those who desire to come but have to wait because they respect the law. Christians should not be supporting or promoting an injustice.

          • Snooterpoot

            And you don’t think it’s an injustice to send people back to the poverty and violence they fled?

            Jesus didn’t tell us to welcome only people who obey the law. In fact, I don’t see that he made any exceptions at all.

            We are finished with this conversation; I am quite nauseated now.

          • LovingConservative

            Leviticus 24:22 (ESV) You shall have the same rule for the sojourner and for the native, for I am the LORD your God.”

            And you think it is “just” to allow some to stay in poverty and violence while they wait for legal entry. The person here illegally can seek asylum, go and follow the rules, but they have decided they are above the law and do not have to keep it, and people like you abet them in that crime (it is a crime because it is against the law).

            If there was a long line of people waiting to come into a store on Black Friday and as people are entering a person comes up and pushes their way through a closed door and enters the store and tells you, the manger, that they really need the item that is on sale, so you would let them stay ignoring the fact you are being inhospitable and unloving to those who follow the rules and are waiting their turn. How ‘just’ is that?

            So go have yourself a nice self-righteous vomit because in being fair to the law-breaker you are being unjust to the one obeying the law.

          • Kathy Ruth

            WHY do you assume everyone one who is different is a thief? You must be a very sad individual!

          • LovingConservative

            Are you unable to understand an analogy? The person breaks into your locked house to live, not to steal. This is like the person who comes to the country ignoring the rules and laws for coming into the country and lives here – in violation of those rules.
            And from one post you come to the assumption that I am a very sad individual. That seems judgmental.

          • billwald

            Modern Americans are not got taught complicated concepts like analogy.

          • billwald

            Who nac know sinners better than sinners?

          • siglavy auerga

            Very well said.

          • Kathy Ruth

            TBH, WE lock our doors because we have a dog that can open them! Until getting this guy, though, no, most of the time we didn’t bother.

          • Mike Smathers

            Some of us do not lock our doors at night. If you have to, you live in the wrong place. Whether I would accept one who moved in with me, it depends upon how he, she, they behaved. I’ve no problem with deporting criminals, but that is not what the article is about. God does not recognize borders.

          • LovingConservative

            So, how do you know before you let the person in, how they will behave?

          • Mike Smathers

            I don’t, but the Christian must be willing to die for his/her convictions. It is a matter of taking a chance with confidence in God. I have no problem with taking a chance on less than reliable people, although I think trustworthiness is the most commendable characteristic a person can possess.

          • siglavy auerga

            and if they have been deported four times already, and benn let out of jail early on an attempted rape charge ( because they attacked a 20-year-old who was able to fight them off) and you see them watching your grandma ?

          • Mike Smathers

            How would I know any of that before they entered my house? I am not opposed to killing, and I might kill to protect my Grandma. I only oppose state killing and killing for political reasons. Besides, my first answer still stands. The Christian should be ready to die before he/she kills. You never know what transformations would be worked by being willing to die because of your faith beliefs.

          • siglavy auerga

            In California we have lost a number of hard working contributing taxpayers in situations like that. Do you give hundred-dollar bills to homeless asking you for money fifty feet from the liquor store? nothing wrong with real compassion. But nothing wrong with mixing in some wisdom,either.

          • Mike Smathers

            I never give to people begging for money. I have better ways of helping those who really need it. I feel guilty sometimes for not giving to beggars, but I think restraint is the better part of reason. Still does not negate any of the other things I have said.

          • siglavy auerga

            Glad to know you would protect your grandmother. Hope you will look out for your neighbors and fellow citizens,also. i might support something similar to the old Bracero program, but i cannot again ( like I used to) support any kind of blanket amnesty program. That just attracts triple the last number that got amnesty.

          • Mike Smathers

            Interesting to know that you remember the old Bracero program. It killed several enterprises in my area of Tennessee. I live in the hills of Tennessee, and we have a growing number of Hispanics (by far not all Mexicans). All I have seen out of them is incredibly hard work. The Americans from outside this state who come here to retire have caused more problems

          • siglavy auerga

            Yes, many ARE indeed hard workers. Especially when they get to a country where they can gradually get ahead. At least, until they begin to earn enough that the gov’t will tax them senseless,same as is done to their ctizen neighbors. But none of this changes the fact that by being here illegally,they are cheating the system, and destroying the wage levels of the citizen workers they eventually (or their children) compete with.

          • Snooterpoot

            That’s a false equivalence. You are talking about people breaking into your home to cause harm. The undocumented immigrants come to America to escape poverty and violence and to provide better lives for their families.

            Nice try, though.

          • LovingConservative

            Where in my post did I say to cause ‘harm’? No, I said they came in to live. There is an equivalent. If someone comes into the country illegally then lives here it is the same as coming into your home to live, for the same reasons you stated (escape poverty, etc.). No, we lock doors to keep out the dangerous elements and so we can let in who we believe are safe to enter. Don’t be naive, not all come in for legitimate reasons, some are criminals escaping justice from their country, some are drug dealers, etc. The purpose of coming in legally is to assure they have a legitimate purpose for coming. Just like you wouldn’t let anyone who wished come in your home, we shouldn’t just let anyone who wants to come to the country in. They should be vetted first and if they sneak in, they should be removed because they are showing disrespect for the law at the get-go.

          • Snooterpoot

            Jesus didn’t say that we are to take care of only the people who meet our approval, did he? That’s the crux of the conversation. I still think that you used a false equivalence.

            We have somewhere between eleven and sixteen million undocumented immigrants in the United States. The number depends on which day of the week it is and how much conservatives want to demagogue the issue.

            It’s neither practical nor humane to keep people whose only crime is crossing the borders illegally living in the shadows. Amnesty (like Ronald Reagan did) is really the best solution to the problem. We should not be a society that is unwilling to acknowledge the need that these people have to be here. If you are still adamant about deporting these people I suggest that you take that up with God.

            By the way, the “open borders” accusation flung at us liberals is a canard. It’s also not the truth; our borders are as protected as Congress will appropriate funds for. The GOP Members of Congress don’t want to further seal the borders. They’ve had the opportunity to do that for years and years and they haven’t acted.

            Do you know why? They cynically use the open borders claim to stir up people while intending to do nothing.

            This problem is not going away as long as conservatives in Congress can use it to rile people up.

          • LovingConservative

            This discussion is not specific to the US, but if you read the string, there are a number of supporters for open borders – i.e. no vetting of immigrants.
            You have not really explained how my analogy is not equivalent. If someone came into your house without your permission (entered the country in a manner that did not follow the prescribed law) and lived there, most people wold not be for that, but the posters in favor of allowing anyone to come in do keep people out of their homes by locking doors and are not open to allowing just anyone into their house. The same concept is why there are laws for entering a country.
            There is so much focus on those who come in illegally, that we are ignoring how inhospitable and unfair it is to those who are following the law. If there was a line at a grocery store and someone cut up front and was served first most would be angry about the unfairness of that. They would want the cashier to tell that person to go get in line like everyone else. Same concept. Christians should be hospitable and loving, but should not encourage unfairness and that is what seems to be lost in these arguments.
            Your position is – well, they already cut in line and are not harming the line, maybe even laughing and joking with other so go ahead and let them cash out ahead of those behind in the line who have been waiting their turn properly. What message does that send?

          • Rowland Reeves

            Loving Conservative and Snooterpoot – have been following your posts back and forth with great interest. I think your comments reflect very closely the overall national debate on this issue. Well stated arguments on both sides.

            The only point it seems that is missing from both of your comments and from the national debate in general is the role of the Mexican Government in all this. The Mexican government is very tightly controlled by an oligarchy of ultra rich families whose goal it is to maintain their own control over Mexico. Because so many millions of Mexican have fled to the US over the past decades this ruling elite have not had to address the glaring poverty and inequalities that their rule sustains in Mexico. The people fleeing to the US have in effect been the pressure release valve that has saved these most corrupt individuals. We merely need to ask; “Why is it that millions of Mexicans continue to flee a country that is so rich in natural resources, agriculture, and cultural beliefs?”
            The answer: they flee because they are not being allowed to share in the riches of their otherwise great nation.

          • LovingConservative

            Thank you for that insight.

          • Snooterpoot

            Hi, Rowland. Thank you for your thoughts.

            Your comment presumes that all of the undocumented immigrants are from Mexico, and they are not.

            Poverty and violence are rampant in Central American countries. I don’t see how we can send people back to that situation in good conscience, and I don’t think that sending them back is in accordance with Jesus’s love and inclusiveness.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Exactly for those that are here already we should offer refuge. But we can’t keep the flood gates open. At what point do we start holding those corrupt countries responsible for their own people? It seems to me that they are able to continue their corrupt ways because we are in effect enabling them by allowing the destitute generated by their corrupt policies to continually flee thus releasing the pressure that would other wise build up against them.

          • Snooterpoot

            With respect, I disagree. You seem to think that being able to completely stop undocumented immigrants from coming into this country would somehow make their home countries want to take care of them. I think that’ll happen when aardvarks fly.

            The simple truth of the matter is that the power structures in these violent and impoverished countries is not going to change simply because people cannot leave. People will just die, some horribly. The people in power don’t give a rat’s behind about their impoverished citizens.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Yes, I would have to agree. I think as our borders are secured and more have to stay home that will put pressure on those governments but those governments will not respond the way we would like. They’ll just grow more repressive. So what do we do? We can’t just let the flow go on forever. Even our country can’t absorb endless amounts of impoverished people.

          • Snooterpoot

            What would Jesus do? Our answer lies there.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Exactly. Don’t know specifically but I’m sure it would be something that none of us here have thought of.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Snooterpoot – if you have a chance please see my response to Loving Conservative just below. Have been following your discussion with lots of interest. Just letting you know here so I’m not reposting the same comments multiple times.

          • Otto T. Goat

            Should homosexuals be put to death?

          • Iain Lovejoy

            Only for trolling.

          • Otto T. Goat

            It’s an express command in the Old Testament.

          • Iain Lovejoy

            What, trolling?

          • Otto T. Goat

            You may think God’s commands naive, or too hard to follow, for all sorts of eminently practical reasons, but putting homosexuals to death is exactly what he has expressly commanded.

          • Iain Lovejoy

            And Jesus also expressly commanded that only those without sin are entitled to put another to death for their sin (and nobody is without sin).

          • billwald

            Trolling for alligators?

        • Kathy Ruth

          So. I’m assuming you ALSO support the laws that establish safety nets for our most vulnerable, right?

          • LovingConservative

            In concept, yes, government has the resources to help others. The problem is that many of these are not ‘helps’ but rather the redistribution of wealth. Taking from one to give to another should not be the role of government.

        • billwald

          The biggest problems in the US are caused by the secret ballot. If a person doesn’t have the guts to put his money where his mouth is . . . .

          • siglavy auerga

            yes,elections are a hassle, perhaps everything would be more efficient if you DO AWAY WITH THEM?

    • Kathy Ruth

      No, hence the words “alien” and “stranger”!
      And, when it comes to the Bible–remember, at the time, the government WAS the belief system! The biblical governments have ALWAYS been held to account for not taking care of the less fortunate–and belief is NOT part of that!

  • John

    I both like and dislike where this seems to go. Yes, I’m all in for hospitality, fairness, justice. But I dislike that it implies no legitimacy for government regulation. It seems to place these fully at odds and I don’t think that has to be the case. Perhaps this is what you mean that there needs to be a discussion and decisions, but if there are only two extremes then progress will not be made. In this modern context, who decides what loving the illegal immigrant looks like? What policy can be both fair towards and controlling of immigration? Can deportation be acceptable at all, or is it by default evil and wrong? Appreciate the article and the below link to the Huffington Post, but the devil is in the details and I see none proposed here. We need something practical or we will just keep theologizing past each other. Talk is a good place to start, but now what?

  • Kathy Ruth

    Reading these comments it seems an AWFUL lot of “Christians” don’t actually trust God!
    Interesting.

    • billwald

      I have my doubts about Jesus as adjudicated and reported by Paul’s denomination. You “Bible believing” Christians ever think about what your denomination might be preaching in 2227 if/when Jesus has still not returned and bailed us out? How many more people does God need in Hell?

    • ExFallwellian

      Which god?

    • siglavy auerga

      Seems that is a problem for all of us. maybe even for illegals as well?

  • Otto T. Goat

    “The alien who resides with you should be treated like a citizen”

    When citizens break the law they are punished.

    • Iphigenia

      At which point we continue to care for them as prisoners, just as Jesus commanded.

      • billwald

        Should convicts have/live a better life in jail than they ever did at home? In their home nation??

        • Iphigenia

          Well, if they were abused and mistreated in their home, then of course they should live a better life in jail. The point of jail is to make criminals into productive members of society, not to make them suffer for suffering’s sake.

          • siglavy auerga

            iI would hate to have to explain that to Kate Steinle’s parents,or Marilyn Pharris’ relatives,or Jamil Shaw’s dad…

          • Iphigenia

            Revenge isn’t the point of the law, or the kingdom of Christ. I guess you don’t believe in either.

          • siglavy auerga

            Revenge is not the point i am trying to make. How do you tell someone their loved one was lost or gravely injured, in a crime that EASILY COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IF the law was only enforced. Because a certain political party does not want to have to answer to hard-working taxpayers,and wants to dilute their VOTES to the level of futility ,THOSE taxpayers are REQUIRED to pay with the lives of their families? Is this why we are paying taxes? To be ignored by the very people we have in the past voted for? This is not compassion, it is a devious strategy of war against us by our politicians!
            When Jamil Shaw’s father spoke fo his son’s death, several Democratic politicians,like the then-maayor of Los Angeles,walked up to inform him that “You know,you are just being used…” Well, i’d like to ask these people why they think
            imported foreign occupying lawbreakers are far MORE important than the CHILD of a hard-working TAXPAYER. As I recall, we are supposed to be equal under the law,and all have equal PROTECTION under the law. Seriously, think about how you would break to someone that loved one has been beaten,raped,robbed,murdered by someone let into the country by the very politician that parent,spouse,child,etc. in fact voted for. Yet it LIKELY would have been prevented if a serious effort had been made at law enforcement. I’m not going to try to snidely insult you on what I judge that you believe or don’t. Just please, think about how you would tell someone that their child is dead, and they just have to accept and put up with that and not do anything to prevent that happenining to someone else’s kid because that might upset some brilliant politician’s plan to maintain political power even as they drive the country over a cliff.

          • Iphigenia

            See, I do want to prevent people from being killed, raped, and stolen from. That’s why I want a system like what they have in Norway, where the focus is on rehabilitation and the recidivism rate is 20%, rather than the system we currently have in the US, where the focus is on suffering and the recidivism rate is 50%. Or do the victims of recidivists not count?

          • siglavy auerga

            how’s that working out with Middle eastern “refugees’/jihadists?

          • Iphigenia
    • siglavy auerga

      Welj said.

    • siglavy auerga

      ‘resides with you…’ that doesn’t sound so much like ‘demands money from you for housing,food,education,medical care, and most of all to pay for their children’s full ride through college,even if it means cancelling that of your child!

      • Otto T. Goat

        No it doesn’t. It’s referring to those who are passing through, and foreigners here legally are essentially treated like citizens.

  • Otto T. Goat

    Leviticus also contains explicit commands regarding homosexuality which you choose to ignore.

    • nyxalinth

      Are you wearing mixed fibers? Eat bacon and shellfish? Then you are ignoring passages, too.

      • Otto T. Goat

        You should ask him that.

        • Blerg

          No, we’re asking you. Do you
          adhere to Levitical law or not? The author isn’t making a claim that we need to follow the Torah; he’s arguing that God repeatedly, throughout the Old and New Testament, commands us to welcome the stranger and the refugee. The Good Samaritan didn’t stop to ask the beaten man if he had a legal right to be on that road, didn’t demand his papers.

          • Otto T. Goat

            He’s the one who invoked Leviticus.

          • Blerg

            It would help the discussion if you would read the article instead of just trolling nonsense.

          • billwald

            How many Jews and gentiles were collecting welfare in Samaria? Isn’t it the history of recent Christianity that it is much easier to support a missionary in a foreign nation than to pester people in our own neighborhoods? Don’t most Christians hate to see LDS and JW missionaries working their block? If the subject naturally arises i am always ready to talk about Christianity but hate pestering neighbors “cold turkey..”

  • Otto T. Goat

    God created nations.

    • Jack McMillan

      People created nations, not your invisible, non-existent sky-daddy.

  • Brandon Roberts

    ok i’ll put this in the nicest way possible i want to state i support allowing good illegal immigrants a chance to become legal however we should protect our borders from the bad guys (drug dealers,terrorists etc.) and we should focus on taking care of our own first. i also do think our immigration system needs a reform

    • siglavy auerga

      we did that for about three million, now we have 11 to 30 million more demanding the same p[rogram. Remember, this was a ‘one time thing’ when it was done. There have been several amnesty programs. If we do it again, will we have another 50 million here within 20 years demanding amnesty and benefits,again?

      • Brandon Roberts

        i meant allowing them to pass through the proper channels to become legal. and i can’t see the future maybe it will maybe it won’t

    • siglavy auerga

      well put. Yet if we use our resources to the benefit of a HUGE group of economic refugees, will we have enough resources left to care for our own? Would it be helpful if some of our neighbors make SOME effort to help their own? What about political and religious refugees? Will we still be able to help them, too. It’s good you want to help. A Chinese acquaintance says “If you allow Mexicans in who break the law, it’s unfair not to allow Chinese in too.” What do i tell him? Illegals have more right to immigrate than him WHY? Who determines good from bad? Why does a good one use someone else’s Social Security number and get away with ID theft?

      • Brandon Roberts

        because if these people are willing to work and showed they could be productive members of society they could be beneficial imo.

        • siglavy auerga

          …and if they tell your employer they will do the same job you do for less…

          • Brandon Roberts

            unfortunately yeah which definitely is a problem

          • siglavy auerga

            it’s estimated by some that more than a quarter of the Irish here are illegal, a quarter of the Asians here are illegal and that about a third of Mexico’s population has moved here in the last 20 years. If you have a Ph.D. in electronic engineering you’ll likely be fine. But for all the formerly middle class folks it’s not so rosy. When we had the amnesty before, a lot of those folks that got it left farmwork and went straight into construction and truck driving. now those jobs are being taken by large numbers of illegals, especially construction. you can imagine what that has done to wages in the construction industry. My neighbor bought a nice but modest house and raised seven kids, putting a couple of them through college, on his construction salary in the 60s and 70s. Can’t come close to doing that today. I think at some point it IS logical and acceptable to draw a line and figure out approximately how many people we can help and demand that other nations help too. all that drug and oil money in Mexico and they can’t help? or won’t?

          • siglavy auerga

            or fifteen years after they get amnesty and their children come in applying for your job…and have gotten their ollege degree on your dime and are willing to do your job for a little less and are able to do it better because your arthritis is slowing you down now, and you overhear your employer saying they’d like to “get rid of you”…What then? Point is, can the USA solve the problems and pay the bills for EVERY country in the world? I don’t think so. If we use up all our resources providing jobs to economic refugees who are working under the table and not paying taxes, how will we be able to help political and religious refugees who are fleeing for their lives?

  • Wasted Evangelism

    Maybe I’m wrong, but God has a long history of deporting. With that said, Jesus welcomes all into his kingdom who wander in by faith. His kingdom, however, is not of this world, so I make few, if any comparisons between the USA and this kingdom which will not be (ever) destroyed. I am unclear what hermeneutic allows this USA-Kingdom of God-likeness to be applied to how we are to view immigration here as a nation. The kingdom does not have open borders; there is a cost and a confession to be made for entrance, even though all are welcome. Just saying.

    • billwald

      “God” has a long history of killing the bad guys.

  • DOH

    I find Tim Suttle falls into the category of missing Scriptural context. He quotes Leviticus 19:33-34 to provide basis for his argument and fails in his intent: “The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.”

    When the Hebrews were in Egypt they were not ‘illegal aliens’, they were there as a direct blessing from God (read the story of Joseph in Genesis) who eventually brought them out of Egypt and into their own land. This is not the case with illegal aliens coming into or being in the USA. Yes, welcome legal aliens but do not suppose for one minute that Jesus condones sin (disobeying the law).

    As for the millions of legal aliens already in the USA I liked what Evan McMullen (the presidential candidate from Utah) had to offer, “The first step toward earning legal status is for all those who are here illegally to come forward and register themselves. Next they would pay an application fee and a fine, undergo a background check, and demonstrate competence in English. If they do those things, they would get a temporary work and residence permit, but would not be eligible for welfare or entitlement programs. If they obey the law and pay their taxes for several years, they could apply for permanent residency. This is not amnesty; amnesty is when lawbreakers get something for nothing. Evan’s approach requires every illegal immigrant to earn the right to stay here.” This idea embodies the Christian principles of grace, mercy and repentance. That I can support.

    https://www.evanmcmullin.com/immigration

    • siglavy auerga

      Wow. You make a lot of sense! Some very good points.

    • Valkyrie Ziege

      ; Hebrews never were ‘slaves’ in Egypt, in fact they owned slaves while living on Elephantine Island, there never was a Hebrew Pharaoh, and you need to realize that religious books aren’t history books.

      • DOH

        In history one generally goes with the oldest original texts; in this case that would be Scriptural texts that are more than 2,000 years old.
        1. The Bible records the Hebrews being enslaved by the then Pharaoh and it was from this bondage that God brought them out of Egypt. In the British Museum in London you an actually see ancient Egyptian carvings depicting the event.
        2. I am not aware of a Hebrew Pharaoh either. Joseph was appointed as Prime Minister, “…second only to Pharaoh”
        3. The Bible is, in part, a history book. It records the story of Creation, the choosing of the Hebrew people by God, their victories when the were obedient to God and their sufferings when they turned their back on them.
        4. There is no archaeological evidence [yet discovered] that contradicts any ‘statement of fact’ recorded in the Bible. Some have discounted ‘facts’ as there is no supposed arceological evidence for the facts recorded. For instance, Pilate, who sentenced Jesus to death by crucifixion was deemed to have been a figment of someone’s imagination as the only reference to Pilate to be found anywhere was in the Bible until… “In 1961 the archaeological world was taken back to the first century Roman province of Judea. A group of archaeologists, led by Dr. Antonio Frova were excavating an ancient Roman theater near Caesarea Maritima. Caesarea was a leading city in the first century located on the Mediterranean Sea. A limestone block was found there with a surprising inscription. The inscription, on three lines, reads: …]S TIBERIVM …PON]TIVS PILATVS …PRAEF]ECTVS IVDA[EA]
        http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2010/07/top-ten-biblical-discoveries-in-archaeology-–-6-pontius-pilate-inscription/

        • Valkyrie Ziege

          ; Using a phantasy to prove a point is similar to a child pointing to a picture of Santa Claus as proof he exists.

          The Bible, and other such religious texts, aren’t history books, they’re phantasies written by men under the influence of a personal agenda, bad food, home-made simi-poisonous alcohol beverages, drugs such as quat/fly agaric/opium, and afflicted by various incurable illnesses.

          • DOH

            And such a comment comes from one who can’t even spell fantasies correctly! Please, get yourself and education and then comment.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; There are more than one spelling to several hundred words in the English language. Perhaps if you studied other books, besides your collection of fairy-tales, e.g., the Bible, with several references to ‘unicorns’, you’d know that.

          • DOH

            Unicorns are mythological creatures that are found nowhere in the Bible. You may be referring to Daniel 8:5, “And as I was considering, suddenly a male goat came from the west, across the surface of the whole earth, without touching the ground; and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.”

            If you actually read and studied the Bible, rather than publicly display your ignorance of it, you would understand the difference between that which is symbolic (as in this instance) and that which is literal (historic, scientific, etc.). Scripture contains both. In the Bible the goat represents those that are in opposition to God and the horn is a symbolism of power.

            And, it should also be pointed out that single horned animals are common in nature. The one-horned rhino and the narwal being just two examples.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; Here ’tis, and, perhaps, if you studied more than one book, including as found on ‘sacred-texts.com’, you’d find a polyglot version of the Bible for language comparisons, you’d know this.

            Numbers 23:22 “God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.”

            Numbers 24:8 “God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.”

            Job 39:9 “Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?”

            Job 39:10 “Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?”

            Psalms 29:6 “He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.”

            Psalms 92:10 “But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.”

            Deuteronomy 33:17 “His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.”

            Psalms 22:21 “Save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.”

            Isaiah 34:7 “And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.”

            Ha! Ha! Ha!

  • Todd Moore

    It misguided when otherwise intelligent and sincere Christians (whose opinion I normally seek and respect) attempt to apply Christian personal ethics at a government level. The role of government was not overturned by Jesus or the apostles. If someone strikes me, I should turn the other cheek. However, the governing authorities should also properly arrest that person. Just as we render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” so also we need to distinguish between the things that are within the scope of government, and the things, such as individuals in the body of Christ, which are God’s. With respect to our say, if any, in what the government should do, we as Christians ought to be the voice of wisdom rather than foolishness and naiveté.

    • siglavy auerga

      Very well said!

    • Iphigenia

      But in a republic, we have the authority to elect leaders who will carry out our political will. It’s our responsibility to elect moral leaders.

  • Gnosissorrow

    Who would Jesus really deport? No one according to Jesus. According to Luke 19-27 “but the enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them; bring them here and kill them in front of me.”
    Your Jesus is not a good example to follow in any case. As with all religions your priority is simply convert others of your religion. Jesus enemies were anyone who did not abide by HIS teachings. Immigration issues should be dealt with in a matter of compassion not with more religious bigotry or efforts simply to convert to your will. I found Tim Suttles bigotry very offensive.

    • siglavy auerga

      How do you get ‘bigotry’ out of his article?

  • Alonzo

    This article attempts to project modern ideology onto God and His ways. It is a complete straw man and wishful thinking for someone to place thoughts and words in Jesus’ mouth that He never said. Complete nonsense and irrelevant.

    • Monte Asbury

      “So there! Nyaa, nyaa!” No argument, no evidence, no effort; just “Nyaa, nyaa!”

      • Alonzo

        Ever heard of CONTEXT? Guess not, because you never learned to read literature in another language, from other cultures, time frames, and geographical locations. I bet you never read great literary works. I suppose that you believe everyone should speak English, be in the same culture, and from the same country as you. I bet you believe that time should be conflated to the present and that there should be no past tense. Spread your literary wings, and you will cease to be ignorant. You comment rings with illiteracy. Now, go crack a book and learn. Your response is so ignorant, infantile, and plain dumb.

  • Jack McMillan

    God doesn’t exist and Jesus is a myth. So asking whom would Jesus deport is pointless. Who would Zeus deport? Who would Thor deport? Those questions would make about as much sense.

    • Medusa Jordan

      Don’t come to a Christian site as a rude atheist! I am an atheist and stating that position in an adversarial manner is rude and pointless. All you achieve is readers here thinking that you are arrogant and immature.

    • Alonzo

      Rabbit trail and embarrassing that you cannot stick to the context of the article but become diversionary. Go find a discussion that discusses God’s existence or stick to the message.

    • DOH

      Can you provide a single shred of PHYSICAL evidence that God or Jesus do not exist?

      • Valkyrie Ziege

        ; It isn’t up to the person questioning the non-existence of mythical figures to provide proof of the existence of mythical figures, and long-haired, bearded faces showing up on burnt tortillas, and grilled-cheese sandwiches, and weeping statues, don’t count.

    • siglavy auerga

      Proven in which court???

  • Valkyrie Ziege

    ; The shopworn phrase ‘Immigrants do the job others won’t do’ are code words for ‘don’t hire blacks’. Every black religious leader should hang their head in shame for putting anyone over the needs of their own people.

    • siglavy auerga

      Sometimes i think it could also be code for “we are NOT going to pay a decent wage.”

      • Valkyrie Ziege

        ; Exactly, and all this time I thought slavery was illegal in America.

        • siglavy auerga

          Slavery effectively continues in parts of the US even recently. Remember the Immokalee (spelling?) farm workers in Florida?

  • jimoppenheimer

    The rabbis taught that the city of Sodom was annihilated by an outraged God because they failed to display hospitality to the stranger in their midst. Read the Old Testament and you will find several very clear commands for respect and consideration for the sojourner in your midst. This is not debatable; it’s very clearly stated, over and over. Of course, as some have observed, many putative Christians have no clue what Jesus demands of those who choose to follow him.
    And, yeah, he’s real, no matter what Jack might opine.

    • billwald

      In either case, Christianity is not a suicide pact. It took the Jews until Hitler to realize that Judaism is not a suicide pact . . . .

    • Rt1583

      “And, yeah, he’s real,”
      Have you got proof or is this just your opinion?

      • Rowland Reeves

        Literally billions of Christians believe he’s real. There is no direct evidence but we do know that something happened 2000 years ago that changed the course of millions of people’s lives and the course of human history. Who or what caused those sudden changes? It’s the same with Islam. 1400 years ago someone created some religious teachings and those teachings changed millions of lives and course of history. It’s the same with Judaism; someone came down from a mountain with a set of rules and that event changed the lives of millions of people and the course of history. Those spiritual leaders are the ones who laid the moral foundation for our current civilization

        • Rt1583

          “Literally billions of Christians believe he’s real.”
          This is proof of nothing.
          Literally billions of children believe Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny are real. Does that make either of them real?
          You know for a fact that something actually happened 2000 years ago? Best of my knowledge all you’ve got is a story written by people who weren’t even alive at the time which these things supposedly happened.
          Ignorance, then and now, is what happens to change the course of lives and history. What is so great about ignorance that so many want to hold on to it and pass it down from generation to generation?
          Morality from religion? Really? Pick up your book and give an honest reading of Exodus 7:3. Your god caused the behavior in an individual and then punished the individual for that behavior. How is this moral? What type of lies do you have to tell yourself and others so that your god is moral against such actions as this?
          You can’t argue the overused “free will” case simply because your book states “But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart”. Pharaoh had no free will in the matter.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Oh, yes completely agree the Bible, Koran, etc. are filled with hate, betrayal, etc. all over the place which various religions use as excuses for religious wars down through the centuries. Everyone knows that. Corrupt people will always use any excuse to gain power.

            But that’s not the point. The point is that at various times in history dramatic and rather sudden changes occurred that changed moral perceptions and the course of history. One does not need to believe that Jesus, Buddha, Moses, or Mohammed really existed. But what we do know for certain is that something or someone at given points in history presented teachings and new concepts that brought about huge changes in the direction of civilizations. The net result of those new concepts are that billions of people, the majority of people in the world, choose to follow the basic moral concepts presented by those individuals. Jesus, “do until others as you would have them do unto you”: Moses, ‘don’t steal, don’t kill”:
            Mohammed, Forgiveness is the crown of greatness, Buddha; “The mind is everything. What you think you become”. Yes, no matter what their are going to be corrupt people who twist those words for personal gain.
            The fact is that the majority of people in the world try to follow those teachings to the best of their ability.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; I’ll believe religions consider ‘forgiveness as the crown of greatness’, when Judaism forgives Nazis, stop holding show trials, and allow anyone that wants to question the events of world war II, to do so without fear of incarceration, financial losses, loss of family, and loss of livelihood.

          • Rowland Reeves

            I don’t quite understand you point on this one.

          • siglavy auerga

            I understand some imams teach that Mohammed said to be merciful to prisoners. It sure would be nice to see that. Sometime.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Actually they do all the time. But not the radicals. They use Islam as an excuse to massacre people. Those Islamic extremists are at the same point psychologically as Christian extremists during the Inquisition 600 years ago.

          • siglavy auerga

            people who paid for what they witnessed with their lives. That is how strongly they believed.

          • Rt1583

            What?

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; Billions believe in Santa Claus, and are convinced they have seen him, and heard the bells on his reindeer, and the sound of their hooves on the roof-tops, does that make Santa Claus real?

          • Rowland Reeves

            Valkyrie Ziege and RT1538 agree with your post but it seems that’s not the point whether Santa or Jesus, Mohammed, Moses, or Buddha were real or not. The point is that at various times in history dramatic and rather sudden changes occurred that changed moral perceptions and the course of history. One does not need to believe that Jesus, Buddha, Moses, or Mohammed really existed. But what we do know for certain is that something or someone at given points in history presented teachings and new concepts that brought about huge changes in the direction of civilizations. The net result of those new concepts are that billions of people, the majority of people in the world, choose to follow the basic moral concepts presented by those individuals. Jesus, “do until others as you would have them do unto you”: Moses, ‘don’t steal, don’t kill”: Mohammed, Forgiveness is the crown of greatness, Buddha; “The mind is everything. What you think you become”. No matter what their are going to be corrupt people who twist those words for personal gain. However, the fact is that the majority of people in the world try to follow those teachings to the best of their ability.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; True believers of any religion pick-and-choose bits out of their religion suiting their personal temperament, i.e., Religion à la carte.

            Such true believers need to realize their religions were created by men with a personal agenda, many of whom were mentally ill, many had access to drugs ( opium, quat, fly agaric, and other such hallucinogenic plants. ), simi-poisonous alcohol, and many were under the influence of incurable diseases, all of which led to experiencing audio, and visual, hallucinations. The More You Know!

          • Rowland Reeves

            Agree to some extent that true believers need to know that “magic” did not create their religious beliefs but on the other hand that point is actually not that important. What is important is that billions of people attempt to run their lives according to a set of moral codes without which we would all still be living in barbarian societies. Where those codes came from or who specifically introduced them is somewhat immaterial. The fact is the vast majority of humanity lives by those codes.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; Interesting how all religions claim to live by ‘God’s Laws’, and when they get caught doing something illegal, again, as usual, they rely on the Constitution, the First Amendment, and a good lawyer, again, as usual.
            You should be aware that those ‘moral codes’, led to the Inquisitions, forcing Christianity, and genocide on indigenous people, and now it has led to suicide-bombers. Basically, the world is forced to fight the Crusades, again, as usual, because of religious ‘moral codes’.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Definitely agree that individuals and whole institutions have twisted the basic moral codes as excuses to commit all kinds of atrocities down through the ages. It’s not the moral codes that have created the fanatics etc. it’s corrupt individuals who are basically doing exactly opposite to what those very codes state. If everyone actually followed the moral codes as stated it would be a very different and much better world. In spite of those who twist the codes and use them as excuses to dominate others the vast majority of the population still attempts to follow those codes in their daily lives. If they did not we’d be living in a barbarian type society.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; There are things in all religious texts that, when taken out-of-context, openly condone genocide, enslavement of children, women, and anyone else, when the mood strikes them, or if audio hallucinations, or visual hallucinations, give them ‘permission’ to commit atrocities.

            We now have proper laws, and a proper legal system, and religious texts should be relegated to the fairy-tale shelf.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Well they don’t even need to “take stuff out of context” to justify murder and genocide. Check all of them the Bible, the Koran, etc. especially in the Old Testament they all have passages from God commanding them to kill everyone in a town or fort etc.

            I do believe that the basic positive concepts of almost every religion are the basis upon which our current mores and laws are based.

            I don’t think religious texts are necessarily “fairy-tale” stuff. There’s some good stuff their but people definitely get messed up if they think it was “written by God”. It was written by humans many of whom had an agenda quite different from the morals they were supposedly promoting.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; All religions began as early humans entertaining each other around the camp-fire with sci-fi, monsters, and misinterpretations of natural phenomenons. There are other books on the shelf.

          • Rowland Reeves

            It seems that “All religions began as early humans entertaining each other” is a little broad. Christianity started by a guy preaching a new message, a very radical message for the times. Islam started after a guy had spent time in a cave meditating and writing. The thrust of his message was very different than the religious tradition he had grown up with.
            Many religions started around the campfire but those slowly evolved. The difference with the huge religions today relative to prior “campfire” religions were their almost “instant” surge and conversion of millions of ardent believers. This was a different historical development and turn for religion. These new mega religions offered moral codes not just misty-spooko goblins behind every bush type messages. Those moral codes were very new and proved powerful enough for societies to actually evolve a legal system and code of personal interaction between citizens.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; Somehow you missed the message, due to the fact you lack reading comprehension skills. I strongly suggest you take a remedial reading comprehension course at your local college.

          • Snooterpoot

            I think you’re a prime example of a north end of a south-bound horse.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; Perhaps you need to take a remedial reading comprehension course.

          • Snooterpoot

            And you continue to prove my point.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; Your point being?

          • Snooterpoot

            That you’re an insufferable north end of a south-bound horse. I’m sure your reading comprehension is such that you can understand my opinion.

          • siglavy auerga

            But are insults really necessary? Why not explain WHY you disagree…?

          • Rowland Reeves

            What was your message? I thought I was addressing your message. Do you mean; “There are other books on the shelf”. I didn’t understand what you meant with that statement. But I thought I addressed the rest pretty well.

          • siglavy auerga

            come on,no need for insults. Really?

          • siglavy auerga

            Please, tell us,what have you found that is ‘better’?

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; A proper legal system is better.

          • siglavy auerga

            Based on… what? an individual’s whims, islamic law, what?

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; The proper legal system is based on the Constitution of the United States of America, and not based on religions, with their killing everyone, as instructed in their holy books, who isn’t ‘thinking’, and following ‘time honoured’ superstitions, the way they do, e.g., ‘Heresy’, and ‘Apostasy’.

            Religions will proudly bray out that they ‘follow only God’s Laws’, until the second they’re caught, e.g. bilking followers, sexually abusing followers, and their children, taking children to ‘faith healers’, ‘suicide-bombings’, and ‘honour killings’, then they’ll run, ‘like-the-devil is after them’, to secure a proper lawyer, and lean all over the first amendment.

          • Snooterpoot

            I don’t think I’ve ever had one evangelical/fundamentalist Christian reply when I have asked them to define their moral code in their own words.

            Somehow, I don’t think they actually know what it is.

          • Rowland Reeves

            I would have to agree. Actually it’s real simple. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” etc. About three or four other simple but powerful ideals; that’s it. I think lots of people get too wrapped up into the whole Bible without understanding the few key foundation ideas that it’s based on.

          • siglavy auerga

            Curious. Which is your diagnosis for Jesus? Are you trained in diagnoses? Not meant in disrespect,a real question?

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; Adults realize that Santa Claus, and the Tooth Fairy aren’t real, either.

          • siglavy auerga

            So the apostles went on to be tortured to death, for something they knew to be a lie? Were they really that brave? We have a written record of how brave Peter was…Doesn’t seem he was brave enough to die for a lie, does it?

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; Those are stories written by men who were too-far-gone into torture porn, and before the public distribution of penicillin, sanitary food shipping/storage/preparation/serving, and, therefore, those stories aren’t good examples of human behaviour for children, nor any thinking adult, e.g., Santa Claus doesn’t fly his sled into buildings, or fly his sled into Christmas shoppers, or murder people in a night-club because their invisible friend secretly told them to punish the partiers for having a good time, neither does the Tooth Fairy put on a suicide-vest, or make ‘pressure-cooker bombs’, or mutilate the genitals of children, or insist their elementary school age children marry old men the family owes money to, nor do either of them martyr themselves for any ’cause’.

          • siglavy auerga

            so you believe they WILLINGLY were martyred for something they KNEW to be a lie? unlikely.

          • Rowland Reeves

            RT1538 – if you have the chance please see my response to Valkyrie Ziege below. Just letting you know so I’m not reposting the same comments to multiple people.

          • siglavy auerga

            what year is on your calendar?

          • Rt1583

            What does that have to do with anything?

          • siglavy auerga

            AD or BC?

          • Rt1583

            Again, what does this have to do with anything?
            Also, AD and BC refer to eras not years.

          • siglavy auerga

            Actually, they refer to Anno Domini…as in ‘Year of our Lord’… or ‘Before Christ’. Hmmmm….how to pretend the guy never existed who the very measurement of our time has been based upon? Tough question….eh?

        • siglavy auerga

          yet only one had a Person who was witnessed to be killed,and rose from the dead

          • Rowland Reeves

            For sure.

      • siglavy auerga

        all they had to do to destroy it forever was…FIND HIS BODY.

      • siglavy auerga

        Contemporary writers…Tacitus’ mention counts for nothing to you?

        • Rt1583

          Good deal. Now can you provide proof of anything written in the bible as being contemporaneous to Christ?
          That Tacitus mentions Jesus doesn’t validate the entirety of the bible or the religion.

          • siglavy auerga

            Anything to invalidate it, other than your opinion alone?

    • Patricia McGehee

      A “sojourner” is different from an “occupier”.

      • siglavy auerga

        an interesting point you make…and also,Israel did go to war with those who invaded their country without permission. Sometimes with nations vastly more powerful than they were.

        • Valkyrie Ziege

          ; Israel didn’t belong to the Jews to begin with, and the only reason it was handed over to the Jews is because the Bible said so, to fulfil the Biblical Prophecies, as if it were a list of instructions to follow, and that scarcely makes it any prophecy.

          • jcgreen2

            The Land of Palestine (modern Israel) did belong to the Israelites anciently (not just the Jews) and God covenanted that the land would be their inheritance forever. It was subsequently taken from them by force. In 1948 it was rightfully given back to them. And it will remain theirs until the 2nd Coming of Christ, which the Jews do not recognize.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; There isn’t any ‘God’, therefore the land wasn’t granted to anyone via any ‘God’. While we’re at it, according to the Bible, Jesus promised to ‘return within a generation’. Therefore, unless Jesus is a liar, Jesus has already returned, ‘raptured up’ who ever, and this is it, anyone born after that are ‘left behind’, and that could explain climate change. Surprize!

          • jcgreen2

            I see that you love to create the shock value & get attention from professing there is no God. May I suggest you reconsider. If there is no God and it’s all over when you die, nothing would have mattered in life. But… if there “is” a God (which there is), when you die, you will be in big trouble! (Unless you tried to live a good life anyway.)Think about it while there is still time for you.

          • Valkyrie Ziege

            ; Be a decent human being, life is a one-way ticket.
            There isn’t any mystery to it.

          • siglavy auerga

            unless of course you are wrong. Is that possible? If it were, could you bring yourself to admit it?

    • Valkyrie Ziege

      ; There are people in America that are here because they were kidnapped from their native lands, by God fearing Christians, Mohammedans, and Jews, and forced into slavery. Scarcely strangers, and sojourners.

      • siglavy auerga

        and THAT is why the Fourteenth Amendment was written,for them. Also,when people crossed from Africa into Spain in 711 and captured slaves in Spain,southern France,and Italy,was that okay? Where are the reparations our ancestors should have gotten?Where is the apology from the Arabs and especially from the Ottomans?

        • Valkyrie Ziege

          ; Exactly, and at least a heartfelt apology is owed.
          I always wondered why the 1966 Cornel Wilde motion-picture titled ‘The Naked Prey’ bombed at the box-office. After all, for the ladies, and certain light-in-the-loafers gentlemen, it’s Cornel Wilde, naked, sorta, or at least in a tiny loin-cloth, ah, but I digress,
          ( ahem, please, excuse moi ), ’til I got to see it a few years ago on ‘Turner Classic Movies’.

          In this video-clip I’ll post, it, clearly, shows Muhammadans raiding an African village, and kidnapping Africans to be sold into slavery, and I commend the late Cornel Wilde for ignoring, including back then, fearing being offensive, and over-riding political correctness. This is reminder that some actors, and actresses, tread heavy for conservatism, bravery under fire, and risk their careers for the truth.
          Not all of them are basket-cases for Hillary,
          Social Justice Warriors, and Liberals.
          https://youtu.be/lk1As4QnaCc

      • siglavy auerga

        some of them would have been left alone had they not been preying upon European shipping. Colonization put a stop to that. unexpected consequences writ large…Bad things can happen when you say your religion makes it okay to rob,rape and pillage the foreigner who otherwise would have been glad to trade with your country…

    • LovingConservative

      I will concede it is very inhospitable to want to gang rape some male visitors even when offered the daughters of a friend. Mighty inhospitable.

  • hisxmark

    Who would Jesus deport? Short answer: The Romans!

  • g75401

    In the US, the market drives the type of commodities available and, when it comes to xtianity, the market has spoken. Conservative churches are growing, liberal churches are dying. Spread the word, Jesus hates immigrants in 2016. The xtian church finally surrenders whatever flimsy claim to moral teaching they might have had. Expect to hear “Hail Trump” along with the xmas carols.

  • Rowland Reeves

    Just to answer the question posed in your title. Jesus would not deport anyone nor would He be here worrying about our immigration policies. Jesus would be in Mexico helping those people overthrow the Pharisees and Sadducees who have created the moral and economic disaster which is Mexico. There is a reason why millions of Mexicans are fleeing their country.
    As to the aliens that are here we should be helping them get educated and job trained.
    As to the ongoing problems in Mexico we have to close our borders. We can’t continue to be the refugee absorption sponge for the millions who are disenchanted with that country. Mexico in terms of resources and climate is a very rich country. So why are there so many poor people? The government and ruling class are corrupt. The ruling elite uses the US as the dumping ground for the millions of refugees that their corruption and poverty generating policies have imposed upon Mexico. We should do everything possible to bring true democratic reform and rule of law to Mexico. Breaking up the Mexican oligarchs would be essential to that process.

    • Rt1583

      So we shouldn’t be the sponge but we should force our way of life and law on them.
      As a citizen of a sovereign nation how would you feel if another country tried to force their way of life and law on the U.S.?

      • siglavy auerga

        So,are you saying they should have compassion on the US taxpayers?

      • Rowland Reeves

        As a citizen of a sovereign nation how do you feel that a poorly run country is dumping millions of their poverty stricken citizens into your county? We have the right to defend ourselves against incompetence. It’s not the Mexican citizens who are afraid that we will impose our system on their country. Those people are already voting by the millions with their feet that they prefer our system. The one’s we will be imposing our system on is the ruling oligarchy that currently runs Mexico. Those people would object for sure. But the average Mexican citizen would welcome a system that is more like ours. After all they are already voting with their feet by the millions that they prefer our system to theirs.

        • Rt1583

          No I don’t believe they should be allowed to freely dump their citizens in our country but this also doesn’t give us any right to force our way of life and law on them.
          I don’t like the way you’re living your life do to your beliefs so I’m going to force you to live your life as I do mine according to my beliefs. Are you willing to accept this? Do you think I’ve got the right to do this?

          • Rowland Reeves

            Yes, I agree with your point. We can’t force them to accept our way of life or government form etc. But the situation is not that simple in the case of Mexico. The Mexican ruling class are using the US as the dumping ground for the problems of poverty and unemployment in their own country. The problems that the Mexican government should have to face are the very problems that we in this country are having to deal with because of their incompetence and lack of concern for their own citizens. As long as we allow unlimited Mexican immigration into our country the ruling class in Mexico will just keep the status quo. The questions are: 1. How do we defend ourselves against the Mexican ruling class’ lack of concern for their own citizens? 2. What form does our defense against Mexican government incompetence take? Should we just close the borders completely? Or should we actively support those within Mexico who want real change? What level of internal interference in Mexican affairs should we undertake given that it appears that they are never going to attempt to solve their own internal problems?

          • siglavy auerga

            Very well said. I used to be pro-amnesty when i thought it was REAL compassion,but now that I understand that it is a political strategy by a certain political party, to dilute my vote so they won’t have to listen to me any more, I am much less supportive. Also the behavior of many illegal immigrants here has changed my mind. My nephew being stabbed over $5 in gs money that he had already given to the gas station attendant pushed me even further. I can remember when most illegals didn’t want to cause any trouble,now many don’t care. I was reading a book lst year where a journalist went to Mexico tho get stories about the families left behind in Mexico. He talked to a Catholic priest who said it was a national tragedy. So many children growing up without fathers in their lives.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Good points. More information on the true nature of the illegal immigrant problem for both the US and Mexico.

          • siglavy auerga

            If someone moves here,they will have to follow the law. i don’t go to mexico or Korea or India or Ireland and look to break the laws there. Nothing wrong with us expecting the same from their countries citizens while here. In California,in the Summer,nearly every week,we have people that return to parties they got kicked out of and shoot the place up, and it seems,almost with NO exceptions,to be one ethnic group. Are we expected to accept this as a cultural thing and allow for it? Sorry,good luck convincing folks of that.

    • siglavy auerga

      Sometimes I wonder, what would happen if we went South to the border, and started passing out assault rifles and ammo to all the REGULAR Mexican people, not the cartels or the government. Maybe THEY could improve the country.

      • Rowland Reeves

        They would improve it. Mexico had several revolutions and civil wars in the early 1900’s where they repeatedly threw out the government. Unfortunately they didn’t have the government concepts and peacetime leadership capabilities of our founding fathers so things eventually deteriorated back to where they are today. Mexico needs to overthrow the ruling class who have even a tighter grip on their country than our ruling class has over the US. Their ruling class make no attempt to solve the poverty and other problems that cause millions of Mexicans to flee to the US. The rulers don’t fear being overthrown because they are basically exporting their problems to the US.

    • siglavy auerga

      Some good points…,yet how could we do that? If we did,wouldn’t we again be accused of interfering with another country’s government and just be called names again? Can Mexico NEVER improve it’s own situation?

      • Rowland Reeves

        Yes, I agree. At what point do we just say; “Hey, Mexico get your own act together”. The problem is the Mexican leaders right now have no incentive to fix their own country because they are exporting their unemployed and poverty stricken to the US. As long as we allow unlimited access to our country they will never be put in a position to where they have to improve their own country.

    • The Happy Atheist

      Wait a second here. There are “push” and “pull” factors that influence immigration numbers. The United States has been interfering in Latin American affairs since the Mexican War. Particularly since the 19-teens, our government has intentionally and consistently worked to install and maintain dictatorships and monocultural economies that are dependent on US markets. Every single time a Latin American government moved in a more liberal, socialistic direction, the US swooped in with economic and sometimes direct military support for the authoritarian opposition. While the US government viewed this as necessary to keep the “worldwide communist conspiracy” at bay (there was never any such thing), Latin American men, women, and children suffered instability, violence, and crushing poverty. These are just a few of the “push” factors.

      However, you’re stuck on the “pull” factors. Sure, the booming and prosperous US economy is a huge draw for people struggling with issues of basic subsistence. There are also vast numbers sub-rosa manual labor jobs that pay significantly less than minimum wage, mostly in west-coast agriculture. Americans have historically refused to take those jobs when offered. Also remember that the US *invited* hundreds of thousands of Mexican laborers into the United States during WWII under the Bracero Program. So, here we have tens of thousands of jobs that Americans will not do, but that migrant laborers are eager for. You’ll have to excuse me for failing to see the problem.

      • Rowland Reeves

        I agree with your post to some extent.
        The US has caused many problems in Latin America but the US is not responsible for all of Latin America’s problems. However, Mexico’s ruling class in particular have charted its own course for the the past 60 years. That course is one of suppression of democratic principles and sharing of Mexico’s huge natural resources wealth with its people. They are the cause of their own problems and their solution is to allow millions of poverty stricken citizens to flee to our country.

        The farm labor issue is the excuse that our ruling class has used for decades to justify cheap labor coming into this country. Example; the entire California construction industry is now manned by Mexican immigrants. Constructions jobs in this country used to be a well paying occupation. But what contractor is going to pay a living wage if he can hire illegals for a fraction of the going pay? The huge California farms that employ migrant workers for years treated those workers at slightly above slave labor respect and pay. The ruling class wants illegals for maids, farm labor, construction, etc.
        The very cheap wages that those industries have paid to illegals has been a major dis-incentive to automate. For example now that California has a minimum wage of $15/hour for everyone including farm workers there is a now a huge push to mechanize everything from weed pulling to harvesting crops of every type.

        We cannot allow our country to be the dumping ground for Mexican’s ruling class mistreatment of its citizens.
        We cannot allow our ruling class to systematically use illegal immigrants to push legal citizens out of their jobs.

        • The Happy Atheist

          So you are proposing what, exactly? That agri-business pay legal workers a living wage (an incongruously liberal principle)? I totally agree. They won’t though, any more than McDonald’s or WalMart will willingly pay its workers a living wage. And who is going to make them? Certainly not the incoming administration or the current members of Congress. Certainly not American consumers, who have become accustomed to low produce prices and will scream bloody murder if they have to pay $5.00 for a head of lettuce. But for the sake of argument, let’s say the agricultural industry decided to pay Americans $12/hour for this kind of work, which is something like twice as much as they pay migrant laborers. Do you honestly think that Americans, soft and pampered as we all are, would flock to California’s Central Valley to take those jobs? Here in Washington, orchards offer around $10/hour to pick apples if you can work hard and fast. Whenever we have a bumper crop, like this year, a huge portion just rots on the ground because there aren’t enough laborers. Almost no Washington citizen over 16 years old is willing to do that work for that pay, which is $2.50 more PER HOUR than they would make at WalMart or McDonald’s.

          I would argue that the Mexican “ruling class,” such as it is, is also a product of US interference in Mexican affairs. After all, Porfiro Diaz was only able to consolidate power with economic support from the US, which fought against the revolutionaries attempting to depose Diaz and the authoritarians who followed him. The United States has always supported whatever Mexican government best represented and protected its interests – again, monocultural economies and stable dictatorships – regardless of what that meant for the Mexican people. What do you expect the Mexican people to do when OUR policies have consistently enriched the Mexican “ruling class” who then work tirelessly to implement US economic policies that impoverish literally everyone else?

          • Rowland Reeves

            Definitely agree on the collusion of US policy relative to the ruling class in Mexico. It is an example of the US ruling class and the Mexican ruling class working together to support and prop up each other. With Trump’s election that could be changing. It will be interesting to see if Trump holds up to his promises of folds under the peer pressure of his fellow billionaires.

            Would disagree on your analysis of soft US citizens working in the fields to harvest crops. For example I would suggest that even Mexican immigrants would not work if they received an equivalent buying power wage of US citizens. Specifically when an immigrant – legal or illegal – works to harvest in California they earn piece mill or by the hour which comes out to about $8 up until this year. In terms of Mexican pesos that has equaled about ( 8 X 18= ) 144 pesos an hour. That is a humongous amount of money for a Mexican. The minimum wage in Mexico today, this year, is 70 pesos A DAY. For a days work a Mexican farm worker can earn around the equivalent of 1,200 pesos in one day. That is 17 times more than they can make in Mexico. That’s why you hear of Mexican nationals who work here for a season and then live in Mexico for two years before they have to come back. Relative to their own economies they’ve made a fortune in buying power. I would suggest that if any “soft” American had the opportunity to earn 17 times normal wages in a day there would be more than enough workers available.

            In addition if farmers did pay Americans the buying power equivalent that they are paying Mexican workers food prices would not rise. Why is that? Because for the past fifty years farmers have had very little incentive to mechanize and automate their harvesting processes. Econ 101 tells us and observed practice shows us that cheap labor is the greatest dis-incentive to automation and efficiencies of scale. Case in point: now that the minimum wage in California is going to $10 / hour in 2017 there is a huge rush by the ag industry to automate harvesting and weed abatement. Once automation sets in food prices are actually going to drop.

          • The Happy Atheist

            Good points that are well made. I think the bottom line is that you and I disagree about how porous the border should be. I suppose if we were able to eliminate the need for manual labor in agribusiness through automation, that might slow the rate of immigration, but it won’t stop it. And to me, there is an element of compassion and responsibility. US policies created much of the problem. I think we are obligated to help fix it.

          • Rowland Reeves

            We are the responsible for those we “sucked” into the US agribusiness for sure. But I don’t think we are responsible for the millions who are now fleeing the Mexican and other governments’ corruption. Closing the border will put pressure on those governments to support their own citizens and create more egalitarian societies.

            Agree, actually not much difference on our positions and opinions. I just don’t believe that we can be nor should be the ultimate welfare destination for the world. We can let in immigrants but not the millions of illegal ones who keep flooding our welfare system and denigrating pay scales in this country.

        • siglavy auerga

          I have heard people advocating closing the border to illegal immigration in order to pressure the Mexican government to change,or better said,so THOSE people can pressure the Mexican government to change. It doesn’t seem totally illogical.

          • Rowland Reeves

            I think it would put pressure on the Mexican ruling class to change. But the history of Mexico is one of repeated revolutions throwing out governments. It seems to me that they do not have enough of a democracy to bring about peaceful change.

        • siglavy auerga

          My next-door neighbor had a modest but nice home with a pool and seven kids,a couple of whom he managed to send to college, all on a construction job in the 60s and 70s. We keep hearing they don’t take our jobs. I don’t think anyone could do that today.

          • The Happy Atheist

            But that was in the 1960s and 1970s, friend. The US economy was night-and-day different then. I grew up in San Diego, CA, in the 1970s and 1980s, and many of my friends were first-generation American citizens whose parents somehow managed to make ends meet. Scenarios like that were possible back then. Not anymore.

          • Rowland Reeves

            I would ask why aren’t those scenarios still possible today?

          • The Happy Atheist

            I’m 46, almost 47. When I was 20, I worked as a manager in a bookstore making something like $10/hr, and I was able to make ends meet. Barely, but I was also living in southern California, where the cost of living was (and is) shocking. There is no way on earth any of my children could do the same even here in Eastern Washington, where the cost of living is 2/3 of what it is in San Diego. The jobs that paid living wages have long been outsourced to countries with vast pools of educated laborers willing to work for half the pay or less. The “free market” makes this inevitable.

          • Rowland Reeves

            I don’t think jobs need to be outsourced if our trade treaties were negotiated with American workers in mind. Those who negotiate our treaties are the ones who will benefit from outsourcing; specifically the ruling elite who control the economy of this country. They benefit greatly from outsourcing but notice US law does not require any type of compensation, retraining, or profit sharing for the displaced American employees. There are no provisions in US law for displaced American workers because that would cut into the profits of the ruling class.

          • The Happy Atheist

            On this we agree entirely. I’m just not seeing a situation where the corporate elite, who spend billions on lobbying and supporting favored candidates, would ever allow such a set of laws to pass. That would shock me.

          • Rowland Reeves

            So true. They are going to hold on to power and economic control as long as they can and they are not interested in the economic impact it has on the rest of society.

          • Snooterpoot

            They want to “take back their country” because they’re mad as hell that they are seeing the undeserved power and privilege they’ve enjoyed since the Reagan administration slip away from them.

          • Rowland Reeves

            Right, check this fact, believe it or not a real fact from political finance disclosure, 158 of the wealthiest families in the US gave almost 50% of all the political contributions on the national and state legislative levels. That’s in the neighborhood of $20 billion ! ! Those people are bribing their way into controlling our government. They expect a return on their investment. That return is the continued control of the government which then continues to serve in their behalf.

          • Rowland Reeves

            The entire California construction industry is now maned by Mexican – legal and illegal – immigrants working for minimum wages and few if any benefits.

      • siglavy auerga

        Spain-Mexico has been interfering in American affairs since before there was a USA. Spain helped us gain independence,then turned around and waged a “cold war” against us,trying to cut off and strangle our economy,emplacing spies in the highest echelons of our military (which we dind’t fully find out about until the Spanish-American war,when our troops found old Spanish archive records in Cuba,of payments to our General Wilkinson,et.al. Funny, how so many forget that today!
        Spanish-Mexican government had over twenty different racial categories for their citizens, with the highest having the most “Spanish blood”. If you married right,you could ‘improve” your descendants. American traders who asked to settle in Mexican areas had to renounce their religion,join the Catholic church, and in many cases marry the landowners daughters (sadly,not Eva longoria or Sandra Echeverria or Lauren Sanchez!) Funny how the side that loses sometimes gets let competely off the hook for their wrongdoing. BOTH of our governments did bad things to each other.

        • The Happy Atheist

          That’s absolutely true, especially the first paragraph. After 1803, the European powers worked hard to hold on to their North American territories. Lots of intrigue for sure. However, although the Mexican government official required immigrants, mostly from the Southern states, to convert to Catholicism, learn Spanish, and all the rest, those edicts were almost wholly ignored. White people routinely flouted this fact, which is one of the factors that led up to the Mexican-American War.

  • Patricia McGehee

    I do not believe Jesus would have allowed MILLIONS of illegals to occupy his homeland. If Romans had come over in HOARDS would Jesus have sat back and said that’s ok, they just want to work. We have had hoards occupying America and our lack luster Government has sat on their hands doing NOTHING for fear of not being reelected. In other words, EVERY ONE of them f’d American’s. You may be a PASTOR, but I would not follow a mealy mouthed hand sitting do nothing. Tell me something…..America’s businesses have moved to Mexico so why in the H are the Mexicans coming to America? I can answer that if it’s too hard for you. They know our Government is made up of Traitors caring more about their reelection than protecting America. EVERY one should be voted out AND then we need term limits to keep the traitors OUT OF CONGRESS.

    • The Happy Atheist

      Wow. Where do I start?

      A.) Jesus was born into a homeland that was **occupied by the Romans,** and did exactly nothing to change that. As a matter of fact, he consistently urged his followers NOT to challenge imperial authority in Palestine. Furthermore, first century Palestine was positively *loaded* with foreigners from all over the Near East. Have you read the bible at all?

      B.) “Traitors”? So how do we determine who is a “traitor”? Is it simply a person who disagrees with your economic policies and proves it by casting a vote in Congress? Are we going back to the days of loyalty tests and the House Un-American Activities Committee?

      • siglavy auerga

        interesting. The Romans were hard on both the Jews and the Christians, but the Arabs and Turks turned out in many cases, to be even worse. Are you saying He knew that?

        • The Happy Atheist

          The Romans were much harder on Christians than Jews because Judaism was religio licita in the Empire; Christianity, on the other hand, was widely viewed as a disruptive mystery cult. Arabs and “Turks” were hard on Christians and Jews in the first century? Maybe I’m just not understanding your point…?

  • siglavy auerga

    Does it count as compassion,when the government FORCES you an your neighbors to pay ? In California and some other states. Orphans and foster care children are put on the street at their 18th birthday. Should they all get college money BEFORE the children of illegal aliens do? To be fair,wouldn’t we have to let in ALL the people in China and India and Nigeria who want to come? Is it fair to a struggling family, to tax them to the point that their child has little chance for college,to reward those who broke the law by paying their children’s way through college?

    • Iphigenia

      Is it fair for you to use an telecommunications method developed and regulated by the US government using money taken from your neighbors?

      And no, it’s not fair to ask poor people to bear the lion’s share of the tax burden, which is why I advocate higher taxes for the wealthiest Americans – not to “punish them for their success,” but because they’re better able to bear that burden. (As an analogy, I don’t make my husband open stuck jars for me because I want to punish him for being strong, I make him do it because the jar won’t open if he doesn’t.)

      • siglavy auerga

        A.G. Bell was not a government employee, (thank God!). De developed the telephone on his own.

        • Iphigenia

          I was referring to the Internet.

    • Rowland Reeves

      Well stated. Completely agree.

  • jcgreen2

    And just who is it that is supposed to pay for the benefits these Criminal Invaders (aka Illegal Aliens) are to receive? No thanks. If they want to come here legally, they can wait in line like millions of other law-abiding foreigners are doing. It is totally not fair to those good people to allow the law-breaking aliens to remain here… pushing themselves to the front of the line.They must ALL be deported. Our nation was founded by law-abiding Christians who worked hard to make our republic great. Illegals don’t appreciate that heritage, but love the freebies we give them. That is immoral!

    • LiteralStrawMan

      which freebies are you referring to?

      • jcgreen2

        You have go to be kidding with that question… right?! People that live here in America enjoy massive amounts of benefits… that’s the reason they want to come here so badly and will break the law to do so. We have spent trillions and trillions of dollars on infrastructure (roads, parks, electric grids, bridges, clean drinking water systems, airports, pipelines, etc, etc…). Plus they get free education, free lunches (and now breakfasts) at public schools, free health care, social security, jobs, food stamps, welfare benefits… Why? Because we are a Christian nation and take care of people in need. Our way over-reaching bleeding heart mentality has cost us the future of our own grandchildren who are going to pay a “huge price” for the unjustified generosity of our generation to people who did not deserve any of it. We have allowed in more than a million legal immigrants every year since the 1980s, which alone is unsustainable. When you add in 40+ million Criminal Invaders (i.e. Illegal Aliens), our future is toast. The end of America is coming because of the massive immigration situation alone.Those who support this travesty are guilty of the destruction of our once great republic.

        • LiteralStrawMan

          Fun fact you can’t claim social security, food stamps, welfare, or medicare benefits as an undocumented immigrant.

          • jcgreen2

            Not true. I have 2 Sons who are both Doctors and they must treat illegal immigrants whether they want to or not. And of course they pay nothing ever for the care. Plus why do you think we give illegals Social Security numbers and cards? Here in Utah we also give them Driver’s Licenses which enables them to gain access to a host of services they are not entitled to. And they attend our schools for free and get free lunches and breakfasts. I know for a fact of some that are living in Section 8 housing and many of them get EBT cards for Food Stamps, plus SNAP benefits… the list goes on and on. It’s wonderful America is so generous. But we are selling our own Grandchildren down the river with the exorbitant cost of the having these Criminal Invaders (aka Undocumented Aliens) here. It must not go on! They must be stopped. Jesus would want us to provide well for our posterity. And the way things are going they are being robbed by these outsiders who have no claim on anything in America!

          • Snooterpoot

            Do you seriously have a problem with making sure children are educated and fed? If you do, I can’t see Jesus within you, JC. Not even one little bit.

          • jcgreen2

            I am a devout Christian who lives his religion. And I do not have a problem with making sure my Grandchildren are educated and fed. But if people want to support illegal foreigners who come here to mooch of our system and take away from my family, then yes, I do have a problem with that. Christ cast the money changers out of the Temple because they were taking improper advantage of the situation. We should follow His example and cast the freeloader Illegals out of our country, too.

          • Snooterpoot

            Christ cast the money changers out of the Temple because they were taking improper advantage of the situation.

            That is as blatant a false equivalence as I have ever seen, and I have seen a ton of them.

            Matthew 25:35-40

            Matthew 25:35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
            36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
            37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
            38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
            39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
            40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

            That’s all I need to know about how I am to treat others. You, JC, have a cruel streak in you.

          • jcgreen2

            Actually, I am a very gentle and kind person who tithes and spends many hours helping the less fortunate. We have millions of honest good foreigners who have applied to come to the USA legally and are patiently waiting their turn. It is a total slap in their face for us to allow 10s of millions of Illegal Immigrants to come here and stay… breaking our laws in the very process and taking advantage of our Christian goodness at the same time. I want the honest ones who have integrity… and we should throw all the illegal invaders out as soon as possible. They can go home and apply legally to come here and wait their turn. We already allow more than a million “legal” immigrants in every year and have been doing so since the 1980s. That’s more than any other country. That is very generous of us. But the Illegals…? No Way! They must go! And there is nothing unChristian about that.

          • Snooterpoot

            Jesus turned away no one who was in need.

            I guess you didn’t take the scripture I posted to heart, JC.

            I think our conversation is going nowhere, so we should end it now. Blessings to you.

          • jcgreen2

            Exactly, Jesus threw the money changers out of the Temple because, as you say, “they were taking improper advantage of the situation.” Just as the Illegal Invaders are doing in our country, and they should be thrown out as well. No difference.

          • Snooterpoot

            False equivalence, JC. The moneychangers in the temple were profiteering. The undocumented immigrants in the US have fled violence and poverty.

            Matthew 25:35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

            That’s what Jesus said to us about this very situation. You can deny it all you want, JC, since you seem to want to find a way around it. But advocating sending people back to the horrible situations they escaped is the same thing as sending Jesus back.

          • LiteralStrawMan

            You’re right! Jesus would have us cast out these foreign invaders! Just like he did with the Romans! Protect your people!
            Make Israel Great Again!
            cum romae!

          • LiteralStrawMan

            And especially forget Jesus’ words about not stocking up treasures for yourself or worrying about the future, hyperbole I say, hyperbole!

  • http://timebottle.weebly.com/ Beau Quilter

    I completely agree with your sentiment that we should treat aliens with hospitality, but Leviticus is an odd place to fish for that ethic.

    Leviticus 19 sounds like a nice enough welcome for aliens; but then you get to Leviticus 25:

    44 As for the male and female slaves whom you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves. 45 You may also acquire them from among the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property. 46 You may keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property. These you may treat as slaves, but as for your fellow Israelites, no one shall rule over the other with harshness.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    According to the Bible, probably everyone who isn’t Jewish

    Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

    and everyone who isn’t Christian

    2 John 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
    10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed

    “For the Christian, Immigration Isn’t About Politics or Economics”

    Economics? According to the Bible, the Christian message appears to be if you don’t work, you don’t eat.

    2 Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

  • dorothypearce

    Saying that anyone who doesn’t agree with you isn’t a Christian is a dangerous place to go. People have different beliefs about how this kind of problem might be handled. After all, it is a complicated problem. You think we should not have deported the illegal immigrant felon who was responsible for a deputy’s death in Florida? We should welcome criminals in our homes? Realistically, some people need to be deported and others need to be legalized. We should concentrate on finding solutions instead of name calling and labeling.

    • siglavy auerga

      here in California one of our local reporters in the Los Angeles area did a sweet little piece on how wonderful illegal aliens all are and how they all just want to work and get ahead. It ran right after another piece about two Sheriff’s deputies were shot by an illegal alien up in the Sacramento area! While some may indeed be nice people,how do we know who is coming? Obviously,as it turns out,not all of them are angels. Last I heard they released the guy whose daughter asked the Pope for help with his immigration case. But it turned out he wasn’t being prosecuted by the evil American government because he was from Mexico, it was because he was busted for drugs! One of our own local activists who is fighting his deportation process against the evil government turns out to have come to their attention when he was arrested for drunk driving. Whatever happened to everyone trying to behave themselves and not attract attention. Apparently,when they lose that fear, real trouble starts?

  • ExFallwellian

    WWCK = What Would Christians Know? Not much more than the rest of us average schmucks. The sentiment towards immutable truth is admirable. But, people use religion any way they want – in politics, science or any other realm. God is made in the image of man’s biases and prejudices. There is no fixed objective morality that drives in the other direction. History tells us as much.

  • D Campbell

    Is there a role for considering the repatriation as a blessing? The restoration of wholesome lawful Christian life, devoid of the greedy encumbrance of American welfare and arrogant scholasticism. Can the diaspora of the gospel create greater wealth distribution to Central America? Can this be a blessing?If this were a pressing current issue, instead of a fear mongering campaign movement, wouldn’t we be called to prepare those to a purpose for their journey, instead of joining their disregard and disobedience to governance? Has the temptation for greedy success and educational arrogance, created this environment where parents are dangerously casting their children across the border, instead of investing in their home towns and providing leadership in their communities of birth? Do we have to be monolithic in our sympathies within the politics? Can we reach out in love with welfare, healthcare and shelter, while we agree that border controls are necessary….

    • siglavy auerga

      How do we invade and ‘fix’ each of these countries that have leadership that doesn’t want to fix the problem. how many times have we given away millions of dollars only to have it wind up in the leader’s Swiss bank account,for ‘retirement fund’? Is there another way to truly fix the problem without ‘interfering’? Do we absolutely HAVE to let others interfere in our country? And say nothing in protest?

  • Peter Lounsbury

    The Bible is very clear about the Christian duty to submit to human government authorities, and the writer of this article seems to have forgotten that illegal immigrants are breaking the law; and that by proxy any person who breaks the law willingly has decided to break the law. I find it very troubling to hear the arguments used in this article to ignore legal authority and to break the laws he or she feels is okay to break. How about this instead…

    Encourage Christians to show mercy and compassion when voting on our representatives in government, and doing everything you can to show the love of Christ to all regardless of national origin.

    The problem with voting for politicians who favor maintaining the illegal status quo is that, that same candidate will also vote for other things that are clearly and unequivocally grave sins (e.g. abortion). Asking or pleading with the faithful to break the law is irresponsible at best, and ultimately do more harm than good when the laws are addressed.

  • siglavy auerga

    Cases like this make me think we are being played for fools. Read this one please: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-25/how-an-undocumented-immigrant-from-mexico-became-a-star-at-goldman-sachs