Speaking for the LDS Church at an interfaith dialogue in
2008, Elder Marlin K. Jensen, stated “Immigration questions are questions
dealing with God’s children. I believe a more thoughtful and factual, not to
mention humane approach is warranted, and urge those responsible for enactment
of immigration policy to measure twice before they cut. Meet an undocumented
person. Come to know their family. If there is a church that owes debt to the
immigrant and the principle of immigration it is the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints.[1]”
photo credit: Mike Terry, Deseret Morning News
Elder Jensen’s remarks were made in the context of several
measures dealing with immigration were being considered in the Utah House and
Senate and were specifically directed to state legislators and other government
officials. His comments are in line with a 2011 official church statement on
immigration. This statement, while discouraging illegal immigration, also
stressed that “The bedrock moral issue for The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints is how we treat each other as children of God” and warned
against mass expulsion, targeting specific groups, and enforcement only
legislation[2].
I felt Elder Jensen's’ statement summed up my feelings on
the matter and I recently posted his quote on my Facebook wall. As a moderate
liberal in a family of political and religious conservatives, I expected some
pushback. I am a peacemaker at heart and generally go to great lengths to avoid
conflict, especially on political matters. The issue of how to deal with both
legal and illegal immigration transcends politics, though, and cuts to the very
heart of my religious faith and what I believe the purpose of this country to
be.
One family member responded to my post with the following
comment, “There's an assumption here that people who oppose immigration do so
because they are not "humane." If you get to know them, you'll change
your mind. First of all, I don't like being called not "humane" based
on this person's assumption that I don't know any immigrants. Well he's wrong.
I probably know more immigrants than he does. This isn't an argument. It's an
insult.”
I’d first like to say that neither Elder Jensen nor I called
out any specific person or group as inhumane. There is a difference between
saying that our laws and practices dealing with immigration could be more
humane, which is having compassion or benevolence, and calling a particular
person not humane. It is entirely possible for good, well-meaning people, who
are generally humane, to enact or enforce laws in ways that do not result in
the expression of the virtues of compassion or benevolence.
Frankly, I am surprised that such a non-specific call for
more thought, facts, and compassion in immigration legislation could be
construed as insulting. Any important national decision should be made only
after taking time to consider facts, history, and the potential impact the
decision could have in people’s lives. Many Americans are jumping to
conclusions and reactions based on fear, as we have seen recently in the public
support for political figures like Donald Trump with his inflammatory remarks
that Mexican immigrants were “rapists,” bringing drugs and crime[3]
and calling for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United
States.[4]”
Another well publicized example is Tennessee state Rep. Glen Casada, the
chairman of the House Republican Caucus in the state Legislature, who called
for the National Guard to round up Syrian refugees[5].
“Othering,” is a term used describe the natural human
tendency to view or treat a person or group of people as intrinsically
different from and alien to oneself. This inclination can lead people to
dismiss the “other” as being in some way less human, and less worthy of respect
and dignity in both overt and subtle ways. Truth be told, while still worrying,
I am less concerned about individual politicians than I am about those I
respect and love espousing views that categorically put large groups of people
in the “other camp.” For example, I had someone very dear to me confide their
fear that “White people aren’t having enough babies. All the Muslims and the
Mexicans are going to keep having babies and soon we’ll be in the minority.” A
different family member recently commented on Facebook that if Utah admitted
any Syrian refugees he would be happy to use his extensive gun collection to
forcibly remove them.
This reaction to immigrants is older than the country
itself. Benjamin Franklin, writing in 1751, complained of the German immigrants
in Pennsylvania, arguing that their politics, language, and culture, and even
darker complexion (as compared to English settlers), was distasteful and
incompatible. Others of the time objected to the Germans, labeling them as a
lazy and illiterate group whose Catholicism and “excessive fertility” threatened
their Anglo-Saxon way of life[6].
Other examples of anti-immigration sentiment litter our history: The Chinese
Exclusion Act, the Know Nothing political party and more.
The United States is a country of immigrants and each wave
of immigration has raised the same types of opposition in the native born
population. This opposition can be generally divided into three categories:
concern for personal and national safety, economic concerns, and fear of
cultural change. Take, for example, a 2014 Reuters poll which “showed that 70
percent of Americans — including 86 percent of Republicans — say illegal
immigrants threaten traditional U.S. beliefs and customs, as well as jeopardize
the economy.[7]”
While othering and the fears that fuel the propensity may be a natural and
evolutionarily important reaction to the unknown, it can be intensified in
unhealthy and unhelpful ways by media, political, and religious figures.
On the other hand, the negative effects of othering can be
balanced by facts and empathy. Facts about the history of immigration, current
levels, the contributions of immigrants to our society, and security threats
can facilitate better immigration legislation that accurately meets the needs
of citizens while respecting the human dignity of those seeking to enter this
country. For example, understanding that, “Numerous studies by independent
researchers and government commissions over the past 100 years repeatedly and
consistently have found that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes or be behind
bars than the native-born,[8]”
or understanding the process for vetting refugees may help alleviate fear about
immigration.
Neither I nor Elder Jensen assumed that particular people on
my Facebook friend list held political views because they did or did not know
immigrants. What I was asserting and will stand by is that it is important for
lawmakers to recognize their own biases and work to correct them. One of the
most effective tools to do this is to develop meaningful relationships and
contacts with a diverse group of people.
At the conclusion of her well-researched book on the state
of free speech in America and the consequences of silencing opposing
viewpoints, Kirsten Powers told the story of a law school admissions board that
chose to reject the application of an otherwise acceptable candidate, a young
man from a religious college. They wrote that they don’t want a “Bible-thumping
student.” One of the members of that committee reminded his colleagues that his
background was similar to the young man’s. Ultimately, the admission committee
decided to admit the student.
Powers uses this story to illustrate how personal connection
can work to overcome deeply ingrained biases. She notes: “We should all make
efforts to invite people who hold different views into our worlds. Contrary to
popular thought, familiarity doesn’t breed contempt. It breeds understanding
and tolerance.[9]”
Empathy, the ability to understand and share the feelings of
another, is a necessary component of a harmonious society because it motivates
individuals to act in ways that are good not only for themselves, but for the
group as a whole. Most people, no matter their religious affiliation, can
remember times when they almost seemed to feel another's’ physical or emotional
pain.
Humans seem wired, whether by evolution or by a divine hand,
to empathize most with those they are close to. Mirror neurons react to the
emotions we view in others and then reproduce them, in essence allowing us to
feel what others feel. It is natural to experience empathy for those closest to
us, our family and friends, those who are like us. As Christians, we have an
added obligation to seek after empathy, also called in the scriptures
compassion, mercy, or charity. We are called to emulate the example of Jesus,
who seemed particularly attuned to the emotions of those around him. Recall
these touching verses from 3 Nephi, when Jesus told the people he would be
leaving them:
“And it came to pass that when Jesus had thus spoken, he
cast his eyes round about again on the multitude, and beheld they were in
tears, and did look steadfastly upon him as if they would ask him to tarry a
little longer with them.
And he said unto
them: Behold, my bowels are filled with compassion towards you.
Have ye any that are
sick among you? Bring them hither. Have ye any that are lame, or blind, or
halt, or maimed, or leprous, or that are withered, or that are deaf, or that
are afflicted in any manner? Bring them hither and I will heal them, for I have
compassion upon you; my bowels are filled with mercy.”
As baptized members of the Christ’s church, we are under
covenant to mourn with those that mourn and comfort those who stand in need of
comfort[10],
in essence to have empathy, not just with those we love, but also our enemies,
those who hate us[11],
and those we consider the least worthy[12] of our empathy. This is a
covenant we renew weekly when we take the sacrament and great promises of
spiritual strength are attached to keeping this covenant.
-----
[1]
Buckley, Deborah. “Have compassion for immigrants, lawmakers urged.” Deseret
News. Feb 14 2008. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/695253048/Have-compassion-for-immigrants-lawmakers-urged.html?pg=all.
[2]
“Immigration: Church Issues New Statement.” Mormon Newsroom. The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Jun 10 2011. http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/immigration-church-issues-new-statement
[3]
Ye Hee Lee, Michelle. “Donald Trump's false comments connecting Mexican
immigrants and crime. The Washington Post: Fact Checker. July 8 2015. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/07/08/donald-trumps-false-comments-connecting-mexican-immigrants-and-crime/
[4]
Trump, Donald J. “Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration.”
Trump: Make America Great Again. Dec 07 2015. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-on-preventing-muslim-immigration.
[5]
Sisk, Chas. “Tennessee Lawmaker Calls for national Guard to Round UP Syrian
Refugees.” NPR Politics. Nashville Public Radio. Nov 19 2015. http://www.npr.org/2015/11/19/456502693/tennessee-lawmaker-calls-for-national-guard-to-round-up-syrian-refugees.
[6]
Baron, Dennis. “Official American: English Only.” PBS.org. 2005. http://www.pbs.org/speak/seatosea/officialamerican/englishonly/
[7]
Bell, Alistair. “Americans worry that illegal migrants threaten way of life,
economy.” Reuters. Aug 7 2014. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-worries-idUSKBN0G70BE20140807.
[8]
Immigration Policy Center. “Immigrants and Crime: Are They Connected?” American
Immigration Council. Oct 25 2008. http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/immigrants-and-crime-are-they-connected-century-research-finds-crime-rates-immigrants-are
%2B%2B%2BJoseph%2BSmith.jpg)
