We live in a time of explosive immigration politics. I work in a parish where I see a microcosm of immigration reality. In the wake of Congress’ failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform, anti immigrant voices have continued to set off the equivalent of political “car bombs” that increasingly bring fear into the debates rather than a reasoned and compassionate look at what will best serve the common good. We can too easily lose sight of the lives of real people who get caught in the crossfire.
Let me tell the story of a couple I will call Jose and Maria. Before they met, Maria taught kindergarten in Mexico and Jose was in his third year of studying engineering. Each came to Michigan seeking a better life and they met at a restaurant where they worked. I met them and their children when they got involved in my parish 5 years ago. They brought new energy and leadership as they dove into parish life, enrolling their children in the religious education program and offering their help wherever they could, including efforts to form a now flourishing young adult group, and to advocate for civil rights for immigrants. They are a pastor’s dream of people bringing gifts to share. But life has not been easy for them. There is a constant fear of losing their jobs or being deported for lack of documents. Early on Jose faced the threat of deportation when he was stopped while truck driving near the Canadian border. Maria quit one job because of an abusive, unjust employer. Jose’s current employer, wanting to promote him, asked him if he had legal documents. Jose told him honestly that he did not. He continues at his job but without the higher profile promotion, still paying taxes including social security from which he will never benefit.
They recently began discussing a move back to Mexico if anti-immigrant laws continue to stiffen. They are also concerned about negative influences of popular youth culture that are eroding the family values they teach their children. Who will be the winners and who the losers if they return to Mexico?
For many, this story of one immigrant family is not a compelling one about their need or right to be here. They were neither starving nor were they political refugees fearing for their lives. But that is precisely why their story is so important. They came here to seek opportunities for a better life, opportunities that are in short supply in Mexico. They came as my ancestors did some 150 years ago because they saw better economic opportunities in the United States than in Germany.
Current outmoded immigration laws give no reasonable hope to the average person to come here legally. As a result we have little control over who comes and we are generating a culture of fear and repression. Comprehensive immigration reform as outlined by the U.S. Bishops (www.justiceforimmigrants.org) would allow us to live as neighbors, giving us better control over our borders as well as the benefit of the tremendous vitality immigrants bring today, as they always have in the past. If Jose and Maria return to Mexico my church will be much poorer. And so will our country.
Father Fred Thelen is the Pastor of Christo Rey Church in Lansing, Michigan and the Chairman of Pax Christi Michigan. He is a Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good Commentator.
Comments
Necessity and law: getting past `illegality'
Juan Marinez, Cristo Rey Parish
Author: Emile Schepers
http://www.pww.org/article/view/12285/
The anti-immigrant movement sets great store by “legality." “What part of ‘illegal’ don’t you understand?” is one of their favorite taunts.
But we know that it is very easy for any government to create new “illegals”; all it has to do is pass some law forbidding people from doing something that they have been doing out of necessity, maybe for centuries.
In medieval England, it was illegal for hungry peasants to hunt the king’s deer. Deer are deer and hunger is hunger, but add this little law and you have the right to hang half the peasantry.
In Spain in the 1500s, it was illegal to be a Jew or a Muslim.
In the USA in the 19th century, it was illegal to teach slaves’ children to read. Until Rosa Parks made her stand, in many parts of the United States it was illegal for Black people to sit in the front of the bus, or to use the “whites only” washroom.
In South Africa, until the fall of apartheid, it was illegal for African people to move about without a special government pass, to live in “whites only” neighborhoods, or to swim in the vast Indian Ocean at Durban except at special “Natives only” beaches. It had been illegal for them to drink wine or brandy also, until international boycotts began to harm the South African wine and brandy industry, at which point it conveniently became legal again.
All of the above “illegalities” (except the one about the royal deer) have been swept away by history, and not only has the sky not fallen, the world is far better for their disappearance. But at the time, many people might have yelled at people who violated these laws (Frederick Douglass surreptitiously teaching himself to read, for example): “What part of ‘illegal’ don’t you understand?”
So let’s not stand in awe of some little law that some mediocre politicians, out of opportunism, malice, lack of imagination or sheer boredom, choose to pass. Laws, and thus the distinction between “legal” and “illegal,” are political products. Laws passed by the U.S. Congress reflect the political struggles of the moment, and often have as much, or more, to do with posturing for various audiences as with protecting the public interest.
Most often, they are passed to protect the interests of those with the most money and the most power. Such laws sail through the legislative process effortlessly. Laws are passed to protect the rest of us only when we organize and demand them, and then they are usually weak and inadequate (like our labor laws).
Necessity drives poor farmers and workers from Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean to cross our borders and land on our shores. They may bring their families with them, or come with the plan of earning money and sending it back home. They cannot get permanent resident visas because the laws of this country do not allow poor farmers and workers without higher education and without prosperous U.S. citizen relatives to get such visas. But, as a wise Englishman once said, “Necessity knows no law.”
The necessity that makes these poor farmers and workers do this is also the product of laws passed by political mediocrities at home and abroad. These laws have set up international trade rules to favor the rich and powerful.
If you are a peasant, you still can’t poach the royal deer, but if you are a billion-dollar U.S.-based agribusiness, you can dump your corn across the Mexican border well below the price it cost to produce it, and then make the U.S. taxpayers subsidize you not only to make up the difference but also to give you a handsome profit. This outrageous state of affairs ruins the Mexican farmer and robs the U.S. taxpayer, but there is nothing “illegal” about it.
So when a Mexican or Salvadoran or Guatemalan peasant chooses to flout our immigration laws — unilaterally-imposed laws of a foreign power which has never given his or her own country room to breathe — by crossing our border without a visa, let’s not be intimidated by those who shout, “What part of ‘illegal’ don’t you understand?” Instead let’s yell back, “What is it about basic fairness you don’t understand?”
Emile Schepers is an immigrant rights activist.