Those who read this blog via a feed reader probably don't care, but I changed the layout and color scheme of the site.
Let me know what you think — especially if it's hard to read.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Illegal Aliens and Blind Justice
Where does "love your neighbor" end?
We feel sorry for poor people who are just trying to get by. We want to give them a break, and we want to see others do the same. If we're honestly trying to love our neighbor, we'll probably help them out — with money, food, or an odd job if we can.
But we don't help them jack someone's car.
The comments on the previous post, "Loving Your Illegal Neighbor," called to mind a very hard-nosed Proverb:
"Men do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy his hunger when he is starving. Yet if he is caught, he must pay sevenfold, though it costs him all the wealth of his house" (6:30-31).
Loving your neighbor has its limits. Those limits are the law, and the law is supposed to be "one size fits all:"
"Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly" (Lev 19:15).
In the illegal immigration debates, poverty cannot be an excuse to violate the law. If it's treated as an excuse to violate immigration law, we shouldn't be surprised if some think it's an excuse to violate other laws.
We can change our laws, and I think we should, but we can't ignore those who broke the law. If a reasonable price isn't paid, the law loses respect required to make our society function.
What's a reasonable price? That's a question for another time.
We feel sorry for poor people who are just trying to get by. We want to give them a break, and we want to see others do the same. If we're honestly trying to love our neighbor, we'll probably help them out — with money, food, or an odd job if we can.
But we don't help them jack someone's car.
The comments on the previous post, "Loving Your Illegal Neighbor," called to mind a very hard-nosed Proverb:
"Men do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy his hunger when he is starving. Yet if he is caught, he must pay sevenfold, though it costs him all the wealth of his house" (6:30-31).
Loving your neighbor has its limits. Those limits are the law, and the law is supposed to be "one size fits all:"
"Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly" (Lev 19:15).
In the illegal immigration debates, poverty cannot be an excuse to violate the law. If it's treated as an excuse to violate immigration law, we shouldn't be surprised if some think it's an excuse to violate other laws.
We can change our laws, and I think we should, but we can't ignore those who broke the law. If a reasonable price isn't paid, the law loses respect required to make our society function.
What's a reasonable price? That's a question for another time.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Loving Your Illegal Neighbor
How does the command to love our neighbor as ourselves relate to illegal immigration?
Should Christians support an open border policy or amnesty or something like that? Aren't these people just looking to make a better life for themselves and their families? They just want the opportunity to work and feed their kids. Wouldn't we do the same thing if we were in their place? How can we deny them that chance? We shouldn't discriminate against them just for being born on the other side of an imaginary line. If we want the poor to help themselves, what more can we ask than these people who simply want to come here and work?
Is that what the golden rule requires? If so, we're in heap big trouble.
If loving our neighbor requires allowing anyone to come here, we certainly can't limit that to those born in Mexico or even South America. Why should we discriminate against those who were born in Africa or China. Don't they deserve the same chance to strive for a better life?
But if we say anyone anywhere who wants can come here, how can we limit that to those who have the means to get here? If we care about the poor, how can we neglect the poorest of the poor who could never afford to travel here? We will have to go get anyone who wants to immigrate here and bring them back.
How could it be otherwise?
Now, if you want to say we should do all of this ... well, at least you're consistent.
But does loving your neighbor really require such open immigration policies? I don't think so. There are three things we need to consider as we approach this problem.
1) Borders like we have today are a relatively modern invention. Nothing in the Bible directly addresses the issue because it didn't exist then.
2) While we're loving our Mexican, etc, neighbors who want to move here, we still have to love our Mexican, etc, neighbors who don't want to. Is the best thing for the people of Mexico to make it easy for their young, hardworking, talented people to abandon their country and come contribute to ours? Wouldn't open borders just be putting a band-aid on the real problem — a third-world country existing next to two of the most prosperous nations in history?
3) While we're loving our neighbors who want to immigrate illegally, we have to love our neighbors who did it legally. If we just throw open the borders, what do we say to someone who waded through the paperwork, waited for permission, fought with the bureaucracy, and otherwise obeyed all the rules? "Yeah, great, but this guy wants to be here, too."
It's easy to treat the Golden Rule as a feel-good, bumper-sticker slogan that can be tossed out to trump someone else's argument, but when thought through, it doesn't present much of a solution to our immigration woes.
I'm not prescribing any particular solution to the illegal immigration situation — right now, at least. I just want people to stop abusing "love your neighbor as yourself" as justification for their liberal views.
------
Related:
Immigration Reform and Christianity 1: Justice
Immigration Reform and Christianity 2: Mercy
Immigration Reform and Christianity 3: Pragmatism
Immigration Reform and Christianity 4: Solutions
Should Christians support an open border policy or amnesty or something like that? Aren't these people just looking to make a better life for themselves and their families? They just want the opportunity to work and feed their kids. Wouldn't we do the same thing if we were in their place? How can we deny them that chance? We shouldn't discriminate against them just for being born on the other side of an imaginary line. If we want the poor to help themselves, what more can we ask than these people who simply want to come here and work?
Is that what the golden rule requires? If so, we're in heap big trouble.
If loving our neighbor requires allowing anyone to come here, we certainly can't limit that to those born in Mexico or even South America. Why should we discriminate against those who were born in Africa or China. Don't they deserve the same chance to strive for a better life?
But if we say anyone anywhere who wants can come here, how can we limit that to those who have the means to get here? If we care about the poor, how can we neglect the poorest of the poor who could never afford to travel here? We will have to go get anyone who wants to immigrate here and bring them back.
How could it be otherwise?
Now, if you want to say we should do all of this ... well, at least you're consistent.
But does loving your neighbor really require such open immigration policies? I don't think so. There are three things we need to consider as we approach this problem.
1) Borders like we have today are a relatively modern invention. Nothing in the Bible directly addresses the issue because it didn't exist then.
2) While we're loving our Mexican, etc, neighbors who want to move here, we still have to love our Mexican, etc, neighbors who don't want to. Is the best thing for the people of Mexico to make it easy for their young, hardworking, talented people to abandon their country and come contribute to ours? Wouldn't open borders just be putting a band-aid on the real problem — a third-world country existing next to two of the most prosperous nations in history?
3) While we're loving our neighbors who want to immigrate illegally, we have to love our neighbors who did it legally. If we just throw open the borders, what do we say to someone who waded through the paperwork, waited for permission, fought with the bureaucracy, and otherwise obeyed all the rules? "Yeah, great, but this guy wants to be here, too."
It's easy to treat the Golden Rule as a feel-good, bumper-sticker slogan that can be tossed out to trump someone else's argument, but when thought through, it doesn't present much of a solution to our immigration woes.
I'm not prescribing any particular solution to the illegal immigration situation — right now, at least. I just want people to stop abusing "love your neighbor as yourself" as justification for their liberal views.
------
Related:
Immigration Reform and Christianity 1: Justice
Immigration Reform and Christianity 2: Mercy
Immigration Reform and Christianity 3: Pragmatism
Immigration Reform and Christianity 4: Solutions
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Sovereign in Sin
Exodus 4 contains one of my favorite passages in the Bible.
Moses has encountered the burning bush. He's been commissioned to confront the king of Egypt, given the Divine Name, and equipped with signs that prove his authority. How does he respond?
When the Lord sees Moses' lack of faith, his fear, He is justifiably angry. But "Aaron ... is already on his way."
I'm always encouraged by the reminder that God may be disappointed or even angered by our sin, lack of belief, or failure, but He is never taken by surprise. I'm also encouraged by the reminder that the success of God's Kingdom work does not depend on me.
Moses has encountered the burning bush. He's been commissioned to confront the king of Egypt, given the Divine Name, and equipped with signs that prove his authority. How does he respond?
(10) Moses said to the LORD, "O Lord, I have never been eloquent, neither in the past nor since you have spoken to your servant. I am slow of speech and tongue."After all Moses has been given, after meeting God Himself, all he can say is, "Can't you pick someone else?"
The LORD said to him, "Who gave man his mouth? Who makes him deaf or mute? Who gives him sight or makes him blind? Is it not I, the LORD? Now go; I will help you speak and will teach you what to say."
But Moses said, "O Lord, please send someone else to do it."
Then the LORD's anger burned against Moses and he said, "What about your brother, Aaron the Levite? I know he can speak well. He is already on his way to meet you, and his heart will be glad when he sees you. You shall speak to him and put words in his mouth; I will help both of you speak and will teach you what to do.
When the Lord sees Moses' lack of faith, his fear, He is justifiably angry. But "Aaron ... is already on his way."
I'm always encouraged by the reminder that God may be disappointed or even angered by our sin, lack of belief, or failure, but He is never taken by surprise. I'm also encouraged by the reminder that the success of God's Kingdom work does not depend on me.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
The Great Realignment
A few years ago we started hearing that America's roaring economy was fueled by credit; millions of Americans, including a great many Christians, were up to their ears in debt. The fuel for that roaring economy wasn't just credit but also materialism as millions bought things they didn't need with money they didn't have.
And it was abundantly clear that changing that, getting Americans and especially Christians to refocus their desires and spend less than they earn, would cut our economy off at the knees.
Well, that's no longer a problem. Our economy is on its knees. Millions are out of work. Millions have taken pay cuts or lower paying jobs. Credit is harder to come by. Even the affluent have cut back on their spending — out of caution, guilt, or simply a desire to blend in.
So where do we go from here?
A major disruption in your life presents an opportunity to change bad habits. We're at one. We can decide to do things differently than before.
The "Great Recession" can result in a great realignment. We can re-evaluate what we're going to value. Instead of toys, we can decide to value simple pleasures.
Recently I took a stay-at-home vacation. Originally I did it because I have much more vacation than my wife. (Where am I going to go without her? Why would I want to?)
But as it approached, I began to look forward to it more and more. The simplicity was so appealing. Instead of going somewhere with the hassles of driving or flying, I stayed home. Instead of bustling the kids around on a schedule of all the sights we wanted to see, I sat in my reading chair. No hotels, no looking for a decent restaurant, no packing or unpacking. I slept in my bed, ate in my kitchen, watched my tv, read my books, and generally had a marvelous, relaxing week. And my expenses that week were less than they would have been if I'd gone to work — and much less than if I'd gone to Disneyland.
Now I plan to make it an annual event — hopefully even with my wife.
I read a while back that in Finland they don't have big houses or nice cars but enjoy a quiet, simple life. (In part, because of their confiscatory tax system, which we do not need to emulate.) I hope and pray we can move in that direction, if not all Americans, at least the American church.
If we live a lifestyle that allows us to give away 10% of our income and save 10% of our income, we'll find a happiness that can't be bought for 110% of our income.
And it was abundantly clear that changing that, getting Americans and especially Christians to refocus their desires and spend less than they earn, would cut our economy off at the knees.
Well, that's no longer a problem. Our economy is on its knees. Millions are out of work. Millions have taken pay cuts or lower paying jobs. Credit is harder to come by. Even the affluent have cut back on their spending — out of caution, guilt, or simply a desire to blend in.
So where do we go from here?
A major disruption in your life presents an opportunity to change bad habits. We're at one. We can decide to do things differently than before.
The "Great Recession" can result in a great realignment. We can re-evaluate what we're going to value. Instead of toys, we can decide to value simple pleasures.
Recently I took a stay-at-home vacation. Originally I did it because I have much more vacation than my wife. (Where am I going to go without her? Why would I want to?)
But as it approached, I began to look forward to it more and more. The simplicity was so appealing. Instead of going somewhere with the hassles of driving or flying, I stayed home. Instead of bustling the kids around on a schedule of all the sights we wanted to see, I sat in my reading chair. No hotels, no looking for a decent restaurant, no packing or unpacking. I slept in my bed, ate in my kitchen, watched my tv, read my books, and generally had a marvelous, relaxing week. And my expenses that week were less than they would have been if I'd gone to work — and much less than if I'd gone to Disneyland.
Now I plan to make it an annual event — hopefully even with my wife.
I read a while back that in Finland they don't have big houses or nice cars but enjoy a quiet, simple life. (In part, because of their confiscatory tax system, which we do not need to emulate.) I hope and pray we can move in that direction, if not all Americans, at least the American church.
If we live a lifestyle that allows us to give away 10% of our income and save 10% of our income, we'll find a happiness that can't be bought for 110% of our income.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)