[…] SeanieB opines Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and […]

Both Old Testament and New are pretty clear on the commandment to welcome the stranger. Hospitality was a major thing for the early Hebrew people; living out in the desert, if someone came knocking on the tent you were duty bound to let them in and show them hospitality.

Leviticus, that part of the Old Testament that conservative Christians just love to quote because it supposedly calls homosexuality a sin (it doesn’t), also says this:

“When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.”

–Leviticus 19:33-34 (NIV)

Amen.

Wait, does God himself even have US Citizenship? He wasn’t born here, and we all know anyone not born under state authorized GPS coordinates is an illegal.

I suppose it depends on whose side the Lord is on. The Lord gives very specific instructions on how to seize a city in Joshua 6:21 where, when the priests sounded the trumpets:

They devoted the city to the LORD and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

However, the prostitute Rahab was spared death.

I just want to say something about the “not assimilating as much as they ought to be” meme. Which is that to draw this conclusion because of hearing someone speak a foreign language in public,* or the like, is very misleading. Assimilation is a process; it doesn’t happen at once, and so far as language acquisition is concerned it can happen very slowly indeed, but that doesn’t mean that it isn’t happening, and the fact that someone continues to use their cradle tongue in addition to English means only that s/he is lucky enough to take part in two cultures. I was watching the Mark Twain Award festivities for Billy Crystal the other night, and was reminded that his grandfather was an actor on the Yiddish theater circuit. Yep, the guy came to this country, and went on and had a whole career here speaking a language other than English — does that mean that he was refusing to assimilate? Obviously not.

None of my grandparents was born in this country, and for some of them English wasn’t a second language but a third or fourth. None of them ever spoke English without an accent. Funny how they managed to teach me to love this country all the same.

*I have no idea whether language is the marker Ned was using for assimilation or not. He may well have had something else in mind. But so many people who talk about immigrants not assimilating mean that they hear people speaking foreign languages, or see them used in signs, that this always makes me think of the foreign language books around my grandparents’ apartment.

Why are non-Christians and even atheists always so worried about what Jesus would do in the certain situations that they believe he would do what they want him to?

If you want to apply the teachings of Jesus, apply it to YOUR PERSONAL LIVES, stop using your interpretation of Christianity to impose your view of government. You all say you oppose theocracy, but you love theocracy when it comes to forced benevolence/wealth redistribution, and violations of property rights.

Ned Williams is a “non-Christian and even atheist” ?

Wanna re-read and re-think that one Glen?

Glen,

Even if someone weren’t a “Christian,” it doesn’t mean they can’t glean words of wisdom from the Bible. And in the context in which I wrote this, I was addressing it more towards those who feel that the Government should reflect biblical teachings…not the “Christian Libertarians” of the world.

Okay Sean.

On this subject, we should all view everyone with compassion. That goes for prisoners, enemies, and so forth. I really don’t think there is a lot of anti-Mexican sentiment out there. Most people like the immigrants because they stereotype them as hard workers, and they earned that stereotype btw. Opposing our current immigration and open border policy does not equal opposition to the individuals who are leaving that toilet called Mexico to come to the Shining City on the Hill.

Glen,

Most people say they like immigrants because it isn’t socially acceptable to say, “I hate immigrants.” Many conservatives (the less intelligent folk) tend to just assume every immigrant is an “illegal” so that they can justify their disdain for people who speak with a “funny” accent and have darker skin than they do.

Hell, I oppose our current immigration policies, but the hatred and invective delivered daily on talk radio is not “compassion” or anything close to it. There is an intelligent argument to be made against both our current immigration policy, or even the policies I would support, but many in the general public aren’t making an intellectual argument, they are making comments and statements based on fear and ignorance.

Btw, I wasn’t saying that conservatives were less intelligent, I was referring to those who have no stomach for intellectual arguments are discussion. The folks who call into Phil Valentine on a daily basis, for example.

Sean, you’d be surprised at how many of those people you described are Democrat voters. It’s not really a conservative/liberal thing.

I really don’t think there is a lot of anti-Mexican sentiment out there.

Hang out with some conservatives sometime then. It’ll change your mind. Aunt B.’s got a good quote up on her site just this morning from one of them. (i’d link but I’m assuming that comments with links are still down after the spam attack)

Oh, no doubt there are plenty of Democrats like that, but I wouldn’t generally consider them “liberal” Democrats, perhaps more populist. Just the other day I was out in Mt Juliet, talking to this guy who said we had to watch out for that Muslim guy who was running to be President. Not having heard of any Muslim candidates, I asked (knowing the answer), and of course he said he was talking about Obama. I asked who he was supporting, he said John Edwards, and honestly I wasn’t that surprised at all.

Yes Edwards is aiming for that union guy who isn’t exactly the same as a lot of other Democrats. Almost every black person I know is a Democrat, and none of them are fond of illegal immigration. It just gives them one more reason to dislike Bush.

Dolphin, am I to assume that you hang out with a lot of conservatives, or am I just to assume that you are basing your opinion on what ONE PERSON said at Aunt B’s blog?

[cough] Plenty of Edwards supporters are in favor of open immigration and are comfortable with cultural diversity, you know.

nm,

Yes, I do know…I have some good friends who like that man.

Glen,

No doubt, there are white liberals who bug the crap out of me with their ignorance on many a subject, and Black Democrats whom I scratch my head trying to figure out why they are Democrats.

Ultimately, there are stupid or ignorant people in every sub-grouping in American politics, but I’ve generally found that hatred because of Nationality or ethnicity comes mainly from those I’d consider “conservatives”.

That isn’t to say liberals are all a tolerant bunch, I know plenty who look their noses up at White Christians (while ironically wrapping their arms around Black Christians) and it can quite often bug the crap out of me.

Call me a pollyanna, but I know a lot of country, uneducated, socially conservative people who say a lot of things about immigration, but I don’t know any that are truly anti-Mexican. Certain things might come out of a person’s mouth that might give one a certain impression, but when people interact, they all seem to get along.

I honestly think that the masses are a judged a little unfairly in regards to this issue.

Certain things might come out of a person’s mouth that might give one a certain impression, but when people interact, they all seem to get along.

I’m all to familiar with this phenomenon. Which begs the question, “is it ok to hate a group of people as a group so long as you don’t necessarily hate the individuals of that group”

Not that the situations are the same, but wasn’t that one of the arguments used by some of the Racial Segregationists back in the 50s and 60s?

“John and I get along just fine, he knows his place.”

If you want to apply the teachings of Jesus, apply it to YOUR PERSONAL LIVES, stop using your interpretation of Christianity to impose your view of government.

If only your side of the political fence would do likewise.

Call me a pollyanna, but I know a lot of country, uneducated, socially conservative people who say a lot of things about immigration, but I don’t know any that are truly anti-Mexican.

It’s just the dehumanizing anti-immgirant policies that they support that are anti-Mexican.

SB, do you even know what my side is?

Sean, blacks and whites are a good example. A lot of the poorer, older white people that I knew growing up, people that used the word nigger on a regular basis, now have black grandchildren that they love very much.

I believe for the most part that people are good and decent. Sometimes interaction and time will bring that out of them.

Dolphin, hate is a strong word, quite extreme. Prejudice doesn’t necessarily mean hate.

Glen,

I think everyone has the capacity to like someone as an individual, while still supporting policies that would hurt those people as group.

For instance, I worked with a guy before (who is now one of Smyrna’s finest) who held the opinion black people should all go back to Africa. However, this guy had a neighbor who he really liked, but was black. I asked him about it, and he said, “I’d make that sacrifice for the greater good.”

I think we have to differentiate what we do as individuals, and what government is called to do.

There is strong scriptural principle for individuals welcoming strangers with open arms and hospitality as Southern Beale references, but also just as strong principles for the government’s responsibility to protect its citizens from encroachment, foreign influence, and invasion.

Sure Jesus would welcome “illegals” and love them and expect the church to do likewise, but would expect the government to deport them.

Sean,
To be clear, it isn’t my support of Huckabee that has changed my view on this. I had no idea what Huckabee’s position was on this until well into his campaign. Which reflects that illegal immigration isn’t as much of a litmus test issue for me. And while I typically opposed Bush’s political inclinations on the issue, I balked at the assertion that he was corrupt or stupid or evil for having said inclinations (which might explain why I can give him credit for sincerity on the issue and Liberals can’t).

nm, sure language is a part of my assimilation hang-up–and it seems to be the most overt characteristic of assimilation. But I’d say the problem arises when I as a taxpaying citizen am expected to subsidize and accommodate an immigrant’s failure (or unwillingness) to learn English. I’d have to say (and I know someone will correct me if I’m wrong) that the influx of Mexicans is unparalleled in the American immigration history–not in regard to volume necessarily, but in relation to failure to assimilate. I can think of a variety of reasons that is true–one is it’s a LOT easier to get here from Mexico (now) than from Europe (especially then).

Omar,
I agree, but I think the more difficult issue is how we should treat the children of illegal aliens as well as illegal aliens who have accomplished near-common-law-citizenship status with virtual complicity of our gov’ts.

but also just as strong principles for the government’s responsibility to protect its citizens from encroachment, foreign influence, and invasion.

subtle, at least. Invasion? Foreign influence? Are you suggesting Jesus would let protecting the State trump protecting the individual?

Cite for me please.

I’d have to say (and I know someone will correct me if I’m wrong) that the influx of Mexicans is unparalleled in the American immigration history–not in regard to volume necessarily, but in relation to failure to assimilate

That’s exactly what people said about my grandparents, of course, and about the others who came over from southern and eastern Europe at the same time. They even used to say what you, Ned, have not said, but which a lot of folks do say about immigration policies today: that terrorists bent on destroying the American way of life were taking advantage of the honest-but-refusing-to-assimilate folks to sneak in with them. So much so that in order to keep people like us out they got rid of open immigration from those areas, and imposed quotas to keep us as small a part of the population as we had been before the mass immigration started.

And those are exactly the things they said before passing the Chinese Exclusion Act. And exactly what they said about immigrants from Germany in the 1840s. (More Americans today have German ancestors than English, that migration was so big.) It’s what is always said, but that doesn’t make it true.

It looks true: there are all these folks around who (subtly or clearly) speak, look, dress, act differently. And they live in neighborhoods where all the signs are in foreign languages, and read newspapers (or, these days, watch TV stations) in foreign languages, and walk around in public speaking foreign languages, so from the outside it looks like they aren’t changing.

But if you were on the inside, you would see that the kids all know English (but speak another language with their parents and grandparents) and are teaching the older folks about American football and baseball, and the adults are learning English on the job, and the newspapers are all advertising English lessons and tours to American destinations as well as ‘back home’, and the local foreign-language communal organization is holding fund-raisers to send the community’s kids to college. As long as new immigrants arrive, there will be some individuals in that community who both need its support and keep it going. (If immigration stops, for whatever reason, the institutions do wither away after about a generation or two.) But what those who see it from the outside don’t realize is that each individual moves through those communities and into assimilation. This never seems to get through to the people who love the “they won’t assimilate” meme, though.

Just think if Jesus was in Mexico.

Then the president of Mexico would be saying “Jesus Christ, we can’t keep letting Americans into our country!”

That would be funny (and it would not be blasphemous).

nm,
Interesting stuff. But how come my ATM doesn’t inquire about German or Chinese? And were all those previous influxes (sp?) of illegal entrants?

Ned,

Its a demand thing, I’d imagine there might be some places on the West Coast that have Chineese as an option.

As for the “Illegal” aspect…the previous waves of immigration required people to stand in line, get a cursory health check, and perhaps a basic criminal background check.

If the same were true today, as opposed to years of waiting to get a work visa, the situation would be drastically different. Instead, we have an incoherent immigration policy which hasn’t been adapted to meet the needs of our economy.

Ned, a better question I think is why doesn’t the ATM card store language preference information.

In the past 10 years I’ve seen ATMs in Chinese and Vietnamese (NYC and San Francisco), Russian (Brooklyn), Italian (the Bronx) … it depends on what immigrant group tends to use which machine where. And, of course, that’s leaving out the ATMs at tourist sites which give you a simply stunning array of choices. And may I say that I think Jackson’s idea is brilliant. Seriously, Jackson, if you don’t have someone working on this with whom you can share the patent, you ought to.

Well the ACLU would probably sue for an injunction on storage of such info on people.

nm, that’s an interesting tidbit but EVERYwhere I go and call Spanish is offered as one of two languages options.

sean, the “demand” rebuttal doesn’t seem like a rebuttal to my assertion that this influx is different in scale and impact, frankly.

But, dang, guys . . . I’m trying to make the trip across to sympathize with your perspective on this issue; go beat up on Donna or something. (Actually, the fact that I am still so far from the Left’s view on this reflects how much the politics of this are so related to “tone.”)

Ned, the ACLU would not sue. That is a preference in almost every web-based application, and ATMs are little more than a web application with a money dispenser.

I think a large part of the whole immigration debate is that people don’t want to be forced to deal with other cultures. I think it is perfectly reasonable to work around that without questioning the validity of a “keep it out of my face” viewpoint.

I honestly think that little things like storing language preference in an ATM card can go a long way to ease the immigration debate.

(and no, an idea like that should not be patented. it is the next logical step in a series of advancements and has no major innovative value)

Ned, it would be no different than a cookie on a website. It’s brilliant - and the only reason I can think of to explain why banks haven’t done it yet is ROI - it could cost a ton of money to reprogram every ATM and send out new cards - and there’s only a minimal financial benefit to the bank.

As with everything else, it always comes down to money.

an interesting tidbit but EVERYwhere I go and call Spanish is offered as one of two languages options.

No one is disagreeing with you that most immigrants to the US these days are Spanish-speaking. We are pointing out that there are more immigrants elsewhere.

And I see no one trying to beat up on you. I, for instance, am trying to point out that what you see as an undifferentiated mass of (let’s say) Klingon-speakers are actually a bunch of individuals, each on her/his way to being more or less English speaking more or less of the time, and that the children of the old folks who just can’t learn English are functionally bilingual in English and Klingon, and that their children are so American that the only Klingon thing their schoolmates will be able to tease them about is that they still eat worms on holidays. That is disagreeing with you, I guess, but if you think that’s beating up then I don’t know where you get your ideas about torture.

Aaaaugh! “… more immigrants from other cultures elsewhere in the US.”

I think a large part of the whole immigration debate is that people don’t want to be forced to deal with other cultures. I think it is perfectly reasonable to work around that without questioning the validity of a “keep it out of my face” viewpoint.

Is it wise to devote time and resources to ensuring that xenophobes don’t have to see “Press 2 for Spanish”?

Seems to me isolating cultural groups would ultimately INCREASE tensions rather than the reverse.

Yes, and isn’t concealing the influx all that’s needed?

nm, good point . . . maybe I can shut you guys down with some war crimes street protests outside of MCB corporate.

Is it wise to devote time and resources to ensuring that xenophobes don’t have to see “Press 2 for Spanish”?

That always seemed to me to be PC on steroids. How to you expect anyone to learn English if it is only an option?

So am I now expected to learn Spanish because of the political correctness? Isn’t that completely assbackwards?

It is not xenophobic to want to protect the national language and culture.

I haven’t been to France in a long time, does anyone know if in France you have Press 2 for English? I would be curious to see what other nations have done on this.

Speaking specifically of the EU, most of their citizens learn two or three languages as a matter of course. Japan has its people learn English in school, and you can find a fair amount of English things in areas where there are a lot of English speakers.

That’s pretty much the case everywhere. Get near a tourist trap, a border, or anywhere there’s a lot of immigration, and you get language accomodation. So yes, in certain areas of France you can find things with “press 2 for English” options. You’re more likely, however, to just find things printed in Frensh, English, Spanish, and possibly German.

I have been thinking about re-learning Spanish.

But I don’t see America as a border town. I think the enabling could have negative effects. I believe a few Texas towns have changed their official town language to Spanish. Isn’t that cultural suicide?

How do we expect people to learn English if we don’t require it?

You may have missed this.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=071116164119.5×42gxdm&show_article=1

Poor guy gets tasered to death. The whole time people are yelling, “He is Russian, he doesn’t speak English.

That can cut both ways.

Beyond that there are public safety issues. Our friends from Mexico are slaughtering people on the highway for various reasons. Being drunk is one thing, not be able to read signs is another.

This is one area I think we should pay for. Anyone should be able to learn English day or night with no fees or tuition.

I have never been able to find any statistics that prove being unable to read signs has caused a single death in this country.

What, exactly, is this culture we are hell bent on preserving? My parents were undocumented. I, like the children of all immigrants, learned English in school. Professional after professional has has stated that though first generation immigrants struggle, their children learn the language pretty quickly by attending school.

We are not drunks. Implying that we are is insulting.

Also, tell me what make American culture unique. What is it we do that people who live elsewhere do not. Is the culture the same in Chicago as it is in texas? How about New York? Miami?

There’s a reason America is great and a magnet to folks from around the world. I term that to be American Exceptionalism. Ideas have consequences and our “ideas” are the best in the world.

I’m out for the weekend.

The reason we’re a magnet for migration these days (i.e. since 1945) is that we have relative wealth. And the reason we have relative wealth is that the Second World War was not fought here: the countries where the war was fought have mostly shown much greater overall economic progress over the past 60 years than we have, but we started out so very far ahead of them, what with not having had our physical plant and agricultural land destroyed, and having a much lower proportion of our population killed off, that it took them a while to catch up. Once that happened, though, on a country-by-country basis, they have themselves become migration magnets. Even China, which has some pretty reprehensible ideas.

nm,
I haven’t looked at any economic data (about relative growths of economies or GDPs or whatever) so I don’t know whether your conclusion is valid (though most of those premises sound valid). But my comment was related to Mack’s question about American culture. And even if some of these “Western” countries are also attracting immigrants, I’d say that most immigrants would opt to settle in America if given the choice.

But regarding China, they’re not experiencing an influx of immigration, are they? And certainly any magnetism they may have is due to American-style ideas and not Red Chinese-style ideas, wouldn’t you agree?

And the population arguments are interesting because the war-torn countries are still lagging behind us (war or no war) in that area–all these war-torn countries have negative population growth, no?

And I’m wondering how our economy has been affected by the Marshall Plan and our provision of defense for all the war-torn countries (and almost single-handedly engaging in the GWOT).