Saturday, March 12, 2011

If I Had The Ear of the Immigrant

One week has past since the rally at the City-County Building, where I almost took my support of immigration up a notch.

I stood there, amid the frenzy of the crowd, listening to Archie Archuleta speak of the right of the undocumented to receive social benefits, more, to receive every right every other person has.

And, the tone of the day, among some of those there, was that the undocumenteds owe no apology for being here illegally. The notion seemed to be not so much that they should be given every right that every others have, but that they already own those rights and it is simply time for the rest of the public to admit it.

I thought, perhaps it is time I agree they deserve amnesty. Now, amnesty means different things to different people. In its purest sense, it means granting those who came here illegally pardons, telling them we forgive them flat out, with no need of them doing anything to qualify.

Well, if you look back on my blogs, you will find me arguing for pardons, for straight-out amnesty. I've noted we grant pardons to people committing much more serious crimes, so why should we not pardon the person who is simply here without getting permission? Murderers win pardons. Why be appalled that someone without paperwork should be pardoned?

The only thing that has kept me from being completely for amnesty is that, yes, it does send a message back to those not yet here: Come now, get your permission later.

That phrase, "Do it now, and ask for permission later" is followed by many of us, when it becomes convenient. But we do not like it that someone coming from outside our country should use it.

Standing with the chanting crowd at the City-County Building, I also wondered if, indeed, we should accord the undocumented with every right, including full right to our social programs.

This would be a step up in my advocacy of the immigrant. Mostly, I have suggested we should make it so they can come legally, make it so right from the start, they are legally here, and therefore, right from the start, they deserve our social programs.

As I walked away from the rally -- I could not stay for the march to the Capitol -- I found myself ill at ease with the feeling some of the undocumenteds see no wrong in what they have done, coming here without first getting permission.

The old "rule of law" thing, you see -- I do believe in it.

As I think on how I felt as I walked away from the rally, I want to cry out to them, to the undocumented immigrants, "Please, please, do be remorseful. Do believe you have done wrong. Acknowledge it. Yes, plead for the right to stay. Hold rallies for the right to stay. Appeal to authorities for the right to stay.

"But, do not suppose you are above the system. Please be humble. Please be the just-want-to-enjoy-a-better-life type of people I envision you to be."

As I walked down the sidewalk, away from the protestors, I thought how often what goes unsaid is so often the same thing that is misunderstood. Perhaps that is what is happening with the immigrant. I thought of my own argument, that since the Declaration of Independence calls for all people to enjoy the inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then we should extend them those rights.

What I might not have mentioned when I made that argument, and what others might not have pointed out when they made the same argument, is that, no, even though the Declaration of Independence calls for all humanity to enjoy those rights, the Declaration, they do not presently fully have them. The Declaration itself, cannot fully give you those rights, for it is not law.

Has what has gone unsaid, come back to haunt us? The immigrant perhaps doesn't even know the Declaration is not a law. He only hears us say that he deserves life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Period. That is it, and he lays claim to it.

But, the Constitution grants the federal government authority over naturalization. If we make laws that are unjust, they are still our laws. Yes, the Declaration declares no person should be barred from life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It even says they are inalienable rights, which, to some, means that is the end of it -- no government can take them away. To others, it means they are inalienable and therefore no government should take them away

Either way, the fact remains, the Declaration is not law. If keeping the law is of value, they must seek for more permission than what they already have.

When laws are not just, we should change them. Would that the undocumented would not seek violation of our laws, but the changing of them. And, do I believe most of them earnestly seek permission, rather than asserting they already own the right to stay.

No comments:

Post a Comment