Tucson church members wear ribbons symbolizing resistance to bill

Reader Comments

• Posted by sandyoyer at Sunday, June 06, 2010 at 11:25 PM

  Is the red ribbon over shadowed by a larger red flag? No christian will dispute that we need to treat the stranger and alein among us with justice and fairness. However, there is one element of difference today in America from the circumstance of Moses's day and the time that Jesus was on earth teachig justice and mercy. The alien could travel to another country at will except for fear of robbers and bandits. Today we have laws of citizenship or special permits to be in the country for designated situations. The Airzona laws are to keep illegals and drug traffickers under control. Every American who drives a car has three things in his or her possession and in the car. No. 1) A vechicle registration. No. 2) A drivers license. And No.3) in most states a certificate of valid insurance. Do we object if we are stopped in a traffic check? Certainly not. That is our protection from the illegals, drug traffickers and unregistered criminals who may be on the hiways. Can this law be abused? Surely, as long as there are human officers. The Arizona law protects that also. It states that one may charge the abusing officer and bring suit againts him. All law abiding citizen need not fear the laws. The laws are for our protection. Churches and employers need to be just and fair but we must obey the laws of the land.

• Posted by darinks@comcast.net at Tuesday, July 27, 2010 at 04:42 PM

  I find it more helpful to focus on the undeniable reality that an enormous number of undocumented immigrants are good persons and contributing positively to our country. Painting a broad brush by using and undifferentiating between "illegals and drug traffickers" in the same sentence is so harmful to our own thought processes and to the mindsets of all immigrants, whether documented or undocumented. It is not reality (i.e., not all undocumenteds are criminals) yet it is causing people to believe that it is the whole reality and the only reality that matters. The whole reality is that an enormous number of immigrants are good, contributing individuals and that a small minority are criminals. The same is true of all races and cultures: good is the norm and malicious intent is the minority. Many in America are choosing to focus solely on the criminal minority of the immigrant population. With this law and the thinking behind it, it seems justifiable to ask the following rhetorical question: Why don't local police have the right to enter the home of any person they believe to be involved in drugs when they get a call from their racially different neighbor about too much noise? Because they have no proof that the person might be involved in drugs. Sure, they bothered their neighbor to the point that the neighbor asked the police to get involved but they simply don't have the right to enter the home. There is a due process. There is no due process in the AZ law other than the police officer's "reasonable" belief (based initially on skin color) that an individual doesn't have documentation. I hope that persons can understand and see the complexity of the intersection of the full scope of God's law and national, state, and local law. Further, as one who believes that God's laws are life-giving and not life-restricting I hope we can create laws that are life-giving and not restricting because as mentioned earlier, an enormous majority of persons in this world, regardless of race or cultural background, are good and intend to do and be good. When we create and enforce laws that discriminate against the good persons within a perceived racial/cultural category not only do we not get bad ones but we encourage the good ones to stop making their good contribution to our society. Bottom line is, this is simply too complex to boil it down to an overly simplistic single law. And as far as the law preventing officers from discriminating...that is a nice gesture but in reality is not something that will likely ever be proven. If a case is ever pursued it will involve a long, drawn out, costly, legal battle at taxpayer expense. Not something I think anyone wants to see.