Jesus Creed

Jesus Creed


Press “1″ for English

posted by Scot McKnight

From the NYTimes, where we see an article that pushes the line that there is a generational gap on the immigration issue.

Forget sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll; immigration is a new generational fault line.

In the wake of the new Arizona law allowing the police to detain people they suspect of entering the country illegally, young people are largely displaying vehement opposition — leading protests on Monday at Senator John McCain‘s offices in Tucson, and at the game here between the Florida Marlins and the Arizona Diamondbacks.

Meanwhile, baby boomers, despite a youth of “live and let live,” are siding with older Americans and supporting the Arizona law.

This emerging divide has appeared in a handful of surveys taken since the measure was signed into law, including a New York Times/CBS News poll this month that found that Americans 45 and older were more likely than the young to say the Arizona law was “about right” (as opposed to “going too far” or “not far enough”). Boomers were also more likely to say that “no newcomers” should be allowed to enter the country while more young people favored a “welcome all” approach….

And the causes are partly linked to experience. Demographically, younger and older Americans grew up in vastly different worlds. Those born after the civil rights era lived in a country of high rates of legal and illegal immigration. In their neighborhoods and schools, the presence of immigrants was as hard to miss as a Starbucks today.

In contrast, baby boomers and older Americans — even those who fought for integration — came of age in one of the most homogenous moments in the country’s history….

Still, divisions were pronounced by age: for instance, while 41 percent of Americans ages 45 to 64 and 36 percent of older Americans said immigration levels should be decreased, only 24 percent of those younger than 45 said so.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(18)
post a comment
T

posted May 19, 2010 at 2:48 pm


So what we have, then, absent a major shift in attitudes in the younger (under 45) generation, is an inevitability of more generous immigration policies.
Good. The ironic thing is that it will be the people now voting against looser immigration policies that will eventually bankrupt the safety net programs, not the immigrants who would love nothing more than to openly earn (and pay US taxes upon) their income.



report abuse
 

Robin

posted May 19, 2010 at 2:55 pm


I’m calling Shenanigans on this article. The author rattles off a bunch of areas where there is supposed disagreement, but only attempts to quantify the question that addresses whether or not LEGAL immigration should be decreased. Since the poll was about illegal immigration (specifically Arizona’s new law) and he only cherry-picks the answer to one question that deals with legal immigration, it leads me to the conclusion that his evidence for his other propositions is very weak.
To complicate the matter, he is using data from a survey that is not available to the reader to check his claims. The published NYT/CBS survey doesn’t provide cross-tabs by age – just overall results.
Here are some of the results:
51% favor the law as written
65% think illegal immigration is a serious problem
78% think the U.S. government should be doing more to curb illegal immigration
74% think illegal immigration weakens the economy
This is not meant to support the law, but to request honesty in reporting. Being able to cherry-pick one data point in a poll that others don’t have access to (at least the cross-tabs) and pretend like the story is more significant than it is – this is fundamentally dishonest.
I need to see the cross-tabs and confidence intervals for the more pertinent questions (Favor or oppose the law, think illegal immigration is a serious problem, etc.) before I’ll buy the product he’s selling.



report abuse
 

Pat

posted May 19, 2010 at 2:55 pm


I’d be interested in statistics broken out by age and ethnicity. As a 45-year old African American, I oppose the law and feel better attempts at immigration reform need to be made. In the meantime, this xenophobic reaction to immigrants must stop.



report abuse
 

Rick

posted May 19, 2010 at 3:29 pm


I have to agree with Robin #2. There appears to be more opinion in this article than fact reporting. But again, it is the NY Times, so that is to be expected.
However, from the poll:
“Americans are generally as open towards legal immigration as they have been in the past. Only 31% — fewer now than at any time in more than a decade — would decrease the number of legal immigrants allowed into the country. Just 27% say the U.S. cannot welcome any more new immigrants, and 49% think most recent immigrants contribute to this country rather than cause problems. But most also believe that U.S. immigration policy needs major changes — or to be completely rebuilt.”
I don’t think the “xenophobic” label works in lieu of this. It appears to be more of economic and legal concerns, not “anti-immigrant”.



report abuse
 

Richard

posted May 19, 2010 at 3:34 pm


T
Is that irony at that point or tragedy?



report abuse
 

MattR

posted May 19, 2010 at 3:36 pm


This seems to be generally true to me…
When talking about this issue with people I know, there is a general divide among those under 40/45 & those over. Always exceptions, of course.
I think, as the article points out, this is often due to experience.
I was raised in a more suburban area, one that is not often thought of as very diverse, and yet I can attest to the diversity of friends and experiences I had there growing up in the 80s.
This has profoundly shaped my view of immigration… and I think one of the root issues; change, and accepting difference. Mine (and now those younger) was a generation that began to celebrate diversity and alternate voices, not fear them.



report abuse
 

Tim

posted May 19, 2010 at 3:41 pm


My understanding of the Jesus Creed is “love God 100% and love everybody”. Is there a magical line where people on one side of the line get loved more than people on the other side of the line? Does the Kingdom of God have borders? Are there illegal immigrants into God’s Kingdom? How do we live as “citizens of heaven” while living as “citizens of the USA”?



report abuse
 

kevin s.

posted May 19, 2010 at 3:50 pm


“How do we live as “citizens of heaven” while living as “citizens of the USA”?”
Same term, different spheres. An open borders policy isn’t tenable on Earth, as it would be in heaven.
To the article, it’s pretty much standard operating procedure at the Times to cherry pick data points a present an opinion article as news. Hence, its junk bond status.
The article also overlooks a rather obvious point. Young people tend to be Democrats, and Democrats support amnesty. It has nothing to do with being more comfortable with other cultures, as the author baselessly asserts.
As these kids get older, their political concerns will pivot from concern over structural injustice to issues of safety and economics. This is nothing new.



report abuse
 

T

posted May 19, 2010 at 4:45 pm


Richard,
Yes, it’s unfortunately both. I mentioned irony only because of the argument that I frequently hear about immigrants using up so much public money/benefits, as if our welfare system is the reason for so many people to move here, legally or otherwise. The reality is that the generation 45 and older–those who most often make that argument–have irresponsibly managed the government budget (specifically money designated for Social Security) and will soon start to draw benefits in unprecedented numbers, all the while seeking to deport rather than admit and tax, the only incoming workforce capable of making a dent in the budget shortfalls.



report abuse
 

Tim

posted May 19, 2010 at 6:20 pm


Kevin @ 8
You wrote: “Same term, different spheres. An open borders policy isn’t tenable on Earth, as it would be in heaven.”
1. I’m sure I’m not understanding. You don’t mean USA citizenship and Kingdom citizenship are equivalent? Yet that’s how I’m reading your first sentence, thus I’m confused.
2. Of course, an open borders policy isn’t tenable. Yet I’m stuck believing in the Kingdom of God which also really isn’t tenable. And I pray everyone day, “your Kingdom come down to earth so that your will be done down here as it is in heaven.” So I feel like when I’m being “practical” I’m being “unfaithful”. But when I’m being “faithful” I am not being “practical/tenable”. When push comes to shove, which should I choose: faithful or practical?



report abuse
 

kevin s.

posted May 19, 2010 at 7:08 pm


@T
The notion that importing an unskilled labor force will prop up our social safety nets has been thoroughly discredited. Citizens use governmental programs and infrastructure as well as pay taxes. Those who have low paying jobs pay little or no income tax, but still utilize government services whether or not they receive public assistance (though they disproportionately do).
Social Security is a debacle. The proper response to a debacle is to phase it out, not to create other debacles in an attempt to prop up a failed system.
“I’m sure I’m not understanding. You don’t mean USA citizenship and Kingdom citizenship are equivalent? Yet that’s how I’m reading your first sentence, thus I’m confused.”
Citizenship has a different meaning in different spheres. You are not a citizen of the United States OR a citizen of the kingdom. You are presenting a false choice. The law of the land is eminently reasonable in this case, and so we are not contradicting our obligations as kingdom citizens by insisting it be enforced in this case.
“Of course, an open borders policy isn’t tenable. Yet I’m stuck believing in the Kingdom of God which also really isn’t tenable.”
The Kingdom of God isn’t tenable? That doesn’t make any sense.
Advocating an unworkable policy, based on the theory that God will sort it out, is naive. An open borders policy will lead to chaos. The kingdom is here, but so is the devil. In a sinful world, God has given us leaders to execute sound policies.
“But when I’m being “faithful” I am not being “practical/tenable”.”
The words “practical” and “tenable” are not synonymous. Perhaps that is the source of confusion here.



report abuse
 

T

posted May 19, 2010 at 8:57 pm


kevin s.
They may not pay income tax, but they do, or would, if above the table, pay fica and futa taxes (also paid by their employers). And immigrants don’t necessarily stay low income even if they start there, especially in second generations.



report abuse
 

Tim

posted May 19, 2010 at 11:05 pm


In the Kingdom, everyone will be fed, borders open, grace abounds, no one seeks to rip off his/her neighbor, agape love is shared by all.
In the world, few-fortunate-hard-working-perhaps-cheating-have-enough, many are left behind in the non-rapture sense. It is win at any cost, profit ahead of people. Grace is out of bounds. You are a fool if you don’t rip them off before they rip off you. Agape love gets you killed.
The clash of the Kingdom/world systems brings conflict. There is no way to reconcile them, although we do. Campolo says mixing the Gospel with the world is like adding manure to the ice cream. It doesn’t change the manure much, but it really harms the flavor of the ice cream!



report abuse
 

kevin s.

posted May 19, 2010 at 11:59 pm


@t
The notion that the second generation represents a great improvement, in terms of income, over the first, is a misnomer. Low-skilled workers tend to have low-skilled offspring. My point, that illegal immigrants will take more from the system than they put in, is correct.
On the whole, immigration does benefit the economy, but only when we control for education, language ability, and skills. In other words, when it comports with our system of laws. That’s why we have those laws.
@tim
“Campolo says mixing the Gospel with the world is like adding manure to the ice cream. It doesn’t change the manure much, but it really harms the flavor of the ice cream!”
But this does not prevent him from engaging in partisan advocacy, nor should it. I disagree with your assertion that the mere existence of an enforceable border runs afoul of scripture.
There will be no murder in the kingdom of heaven, but we certainly must have laws against the practice. Does the existence of these laws somehow muddle God’s plan?



report abuse
 

crystal

posted May 20, 2010 at 6:08 am


To Pat #3. This is not xenophobia. There are real serious issues happening here. I am a 43-year old African American woman and I actually read the law. Too often, black people get caught up in what happened to us in regards to police relationships. This does not apply here. FYI, Arizona’s legislation mirrors the Federal Immigration Law which has been on the books for over 60 years. You obviously do not live on one of the border states where the visual and daily problem occurs (i.e., murdered rancher, home invasions, chopped off head residents driveway, murdered policemen, etc.). Phoenix had approximately 370 kidnappings in 2009 alone. Arizona has every right to protect its state, border, and legal citizens. Look at our schools now. Finances that are suppose to go to science, math, and other programs to educate our kids are being put to English Learners. Do some research. READ THE LEGISLATION. If you still disagree with Arizona, you are more than welcome to pay for all the illegals coming here out of your own purse.



report abuse
 

Richard

posted May 20, 2010 at 10:19 am


@ 15 Crystal
Speaking of research… crime is down in border areas and especially Arizona even as the perception of danger has increased:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/05/arizona-immigration-crime-border-safer.html



report abuse
 

kevin s.

posted May 20, 2010 at 12:03 pm


The conclusion of that article seems to be that crime is migrating away from the border.
That said, the kidnapping trade represents a dangerous and lucrative new category of crime in Phoenix. That will only increase with lax enforcement of immigration laws, offsetting a dip in crime rate reflexive of national trends.



report abuse
 

Ben

posted May 20, 2010 at 10:23 pm


Whether crime is up or down on the border they’re simply enforcing the federal law.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More Blogs To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Jesus Creed. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Red Letters with Tom Davis Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!  

posted 11:15:58am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Our Common Prayerbook 30 - 3
Psalm 30 thanks God (vv. 1-3, 11-12) and exhorts others to thank God (vv. 4-5). Both emerge from the concrete reality of David's own experience. Here is what that experience looks like:Step one: David was set on high and was flourishing at the hand of God's bounty (v. 7a).Step two: David became too

posted 12:15:30pm Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Theology After Darwin 1 (RJS)
One of the more important and more difficult pieces of the puzzle as we feel our way forward at the interface of science and faith is the theological implications of discoveries in modern science. A comment on my post Evolution in the Key of D: Deity or Deism noted: ...this reminds me of why I get a

posted 6:01:52am Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Almost Christian 4
Who does well when it comes to passing on the faith to the youth? Studies show two groups do really well: conservative Protestants and Mormons; two groups that don't do well are mainline Protestants and Roman Catholics. Kenda Dean's new book is called Almost Christian: What the Faith of Ou

posted 12:01:53am Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Let's Get Neanderthal!
The Cave Man Diet, or Paleo Diet, is getting attention. (Nothing is said about Culver's at all.) The big omission, I have to admit, is that those folks were hunters -- using spears or smacking some rabbit upside the conk or grabbing a fish or two with their hands ... but that's what makes this diet

posted 2:05:48pm Aug. 30, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.