|
| |
|
This page is archived from the
217th GA, 2006 |
|
Social Justice |
|
On immigration concerns: Is cultural diversity a punishment for sin
... or a gift of God? [5-26-06]
Theologian Dr. Choan-Seng (C.S.) Song argues from the story
of the Tower of Babel that diversity is a divine gift.
He concludes his brief essay:
Cultural pluralism is a challenge to the arrogance of
any one human community. But more than that, our diversity is a God-given
means by which human communities correct and enrich one another. God
created cultural diversity, for our good.
For
the full article >> |
| GA will consider "Resolution in
Support of Ongoing Partnership Work with the Coalition of Immokalee Workers
and the Campaign for Fair Food" [Witherspoon, Doug
King - 5-23-06] The
resolution, presented by the Advocacy Committee for Racial and Ethnic
Concerns, traces the theological foundation for the Presbyterian Church's
ongoing efforts for justice for farmworkers, some of the efforts of the
past, and then reaffirms the use of consumer action (e.g. boycotts,
public protest) in the struggle for economic justice, acknowledges that such
action may be called for in the ongoing Campaign for Fair Food, authorizes
the General Assembly Council to approve Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
participation in such consumer actions if it is taken in accord with
existing Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) criteria and in concert with our
partners in the Alliance for Fair Food, and calls for continuing promotion
of this resolution through preaching, education, and participation in the
Campaign for Fair Food by all settings of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
through periodic mailings to congregations and the use of resources
available on www.pcusa.org/fairfood.
The full text of
the resolution >> |
|
Immigration before the GA
By Parrish W. Jones, Ph.D.
Minister on roll of Presbytery of James
[Submitted by Presbyterian Peace Fellowship, 5-17-06]
Two overtures have been sent to GA that relate to the issue of immigration.
The Synod of the Southwest (item
09-12) addresses the issue of the border most directly and immigration
obliquely giving some principles but giving little in the way that those
principles may be worked out in border policy. Its confessional nature (3.a)
is admirable and should be lifted up, but it is at times confusing.
I agree that one conclusion, which is rightly drawn from the Bible, is
that God has a "bias for the powerless, the stranger, the poor and hungry."
However, claiming that the Bible "affirms" that bias opens the overture to
persons who will make that the ground of their argument against the overture
instead of the overall intent. 3.b. could read differently without losing
the effect or the meaning. I would suggest that the committee address that
issue.
I find 3.c. simply confusing. Indeed, it is probably prudent to emphasize
the need for border security, but doesn’t our border security itself have to
serve a larger purpose than just keeping people out, and doesn't it need to
be carried out in the most prudent way possible for the greatest effect?
Can't we address directly the issue of making the mission of border security
serve a purpose besides that of political window dressing? What are the real
issues that border security needs to address and what policies may relieve
the pressure on the border?
The second part of 3.c. needs to be in a different paragraph. I would
suggest the following: "our country needs to have clear, just, and
constitutional immigration laws and policy; d. the
belief that just immigration laws, which that protect human life,
support the integrity of families, are possible, and can
and establish legal guest worker programs that benefit both the U.S. economy
and the workers’ families, and address the root causes of
illegal immigration."
The overture claims to address ways to promote humane reform, but it
provides primarily theoretical/theological guidance. The proposal would do
well to have included the Faith-Based Principles for Immigration Reform that
come out of No More Deaths, an organization on the front lines in Arizona
which falls within the bounds of the Synod of the Southwest.
These corrections do not solve the problems with this overture. It needs
badly to focus. Border policy deserves its own overture. While immigration
is not divorced from border policy, much that needs to be done regarding the
border has nothing to do with immigration per se but with migration and free
movement or trade of labor. That being said, see below.
The Presbytery of New York has sent a more focused overture on
immigration and migration (item
09-15). However, paragraph 6 is confusing as it fails to mention what
legislation it desires to defeat. Paragraph 5 is a not so obvious reference
to the church being the church in the face of a law that may prohibit
churches from aiding undocumented persons, such as HR 4437 would do. So the
overture needs revision to make that clear.
Paragraph 7 should reference the GA resolutions of 1984, 1985, and 1999
for historical connection.
The overture is strengthened by its historical, theological and biblical
rationale. It is also strong because it calls forth an essential principle
of American life, namely, "justice for all," and our common heritage as
immigrant peoples. Perhaps we would do well to recall that a primary
principle of U.S. governance is freedom of travel, not just for work but
also for pleasure – a right U.S. citizens enjoy far more than any others.
Conclusions:
I hope that the committee will deal with these two
overtures in a way that will make it possible to address both border issues
and issues of migration and immigration. As a church we cannot surrender to
the common perception that all persons who come to "America" wish to stay.
Some would simply like the right to come and go for work. One problem with
the Border is that it creates a barrier not just for coming but also for
going. See my op-ed "Unintentional
Immigrants."
|
| |
|
Do you want to
be notified whenever something new is added to this web site?
Just send a note, and we'll add you to our e-list for brief
notes when something new is posted here.
|
| |
|
This website has been created by a number of progressive
organizations related to the Presbyterian Church (USA), with two
main purposes: 1. We
want to share our concerns and views with commissioners and others
attending the Assembly, and with anyone else who is watching from
afar. While some of our groups focus on one area of concern
and others are more general in their focus, we are all committed to
the wholeness of our world, which we understand to involve justice
and peace and the well-being of all people; and we are committed to
the wholeness and health of our Church and its witness and service
in the world.
2. We want to get to know
you better and serve your concerns and needs in any way we can.
So we will invite you to share your views with us and with one
another with any email responses or questions. We'll invite
your responses with links here and there, and we'll try to post
those that seem to contribute to our conversations.
Just send a note now, and tell us how we can be helpful!
|
|
