Thursday, May 25, 2006

The Local Paper is Desperate to Fill Space

The following is in today's paper...

Cruel Compassion for Illegals

Of all the discussions surrounding the immigration issue regarding illegals there is one question I have heard no one ask. Of course, the reason for this could be it is not a very important question to ask. Some questions may be very interesting and entertaining to mull and chew on and yet be no more important than questions that are never really asked. So at the risk of sounding preposterous allow me to ask what I suppose is an unasked question.

What makes anyone think that amnesty (or not prosecuting illegals) is compassionate?

You see, there is a lot of talk about our need to be compassionate toward those who have entered our land illegally. And since I desire to be compassionate as most do, I of course admit that those who exhort us to such behavior are to be agreed with. However it is here where I must part ways with most people. I would, in fact, call it patent cruelty to grant amnesty to these who have turned their noses up at the laws of our land.

Now I do realize that this is the direct antithesis of all the theses given. This is true for those who argue for amnesty and those who argue against it. Those who argue for amnesty do so because of their assumption that it is the most compassionate position to take. Those who argue against anything that smells like amnesty assume that compassion is either not part of the equation or is reserved for citizens who are hurt by lax immigration policies. I agree with the first who believes we should show compassion to the illegals but I disagree with the policy of amnesty. I agree with the second who wants to prosecute the illegals and send them packing but I disagree with the notion of compassion not being a necessary factor in our decision making.

In other words, I believe the most compassionate action our country could undertake is to punish those who have broken our laws and send them to the very end of the line.

Parents will understand this instinctively. For if a child is not punished for bad behavior, the very lack of punishment will redound to more poor behavior. Indeed, if the child is rewarded for his bad behavior a parent can only expect more of the same. The correction of a child by a parent is intrinsically a kind thing. Consequently, the worst a parent can do is to not punish their children. A parent does punish lying simply because they lied but also with the hope they will see the inherent wrongness of lying and will not do the same in the future. Punishment proves compassion.

It should be no wonder that punishing criminals in our country is a kindness to them. Punishment and prosecution that follow a blatant disregard for our laws naturally exhibit the very worth of the law or laws which were broken. It is gift to those who have never seen what is good to see clearly what is bad. Only those with no remorse disagree.

To my chagrin, this tack would never be ventured by the politicians of our day. For we have bought into a worldview which assumes the most compassionate thing we can do is let people get away with criminal behavior. This may affect us little, but I can only guess that it will be to the detriment of our country and its youngest inhabitants: legal and illegal.

No comments: