The When Heaven and Earth Collide podcast airs next an interview that I conducted in June at the Southern Baptist Convention with Dr. Richard Land, president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in Charlotte, NC. Dr. Land is the former long-time president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) where he also helped organize the Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT) and was a founding member. I hosted an Evangelical Immigration Table booth at the SBC and was able to conduct almost two dozen interviews with Southern Baptist pastors and leaders, including Dr. Land.
In this interview, Dr. Land talks about why we need immigration reform, how our government has created a situation where there has been, as he says, “Two signs up at the border for last 50 yrs – One says no trespassing and the other says help wanted.” He goes on to say that It is immoral to break the law, but it is also immoral to not enforce the law for fifty years and then try to enforce it retroactively. “If the govt. sent me a letter saying we’ve never given you a speeding ticket for the way you drive on the interstate, but we have monitored it and we’re giving you a ticket for every time you broke the speeding limit are never punished you for speeding but now we are going to enforce the speeding laws and punish you for all the times you sped in the past, I’d have to take out a loan. It would be wrong.”
That sentiment leads us into a really fascinating discussion on the rule of law and how we are undermining it by not passing comprehensive immigration reform. He then puts forward some concrete solutions to how we can fix our broken immigration system in ways that strengthen us a nation and helps us move forward in both justice and mercy. Dr. Land goes on to encourage a legalization process for undocumented immigrants so they can come out of the shadows and contribute and really be Americans.
We talk about the “idea” of America and how immigrants can actually be Americans and how they should be integrated into our nation. We also talk about how churches can speak to a divided nation on this issue. It really was a fascinating interview and lots of strong statements were made about what we can be and do and how we can actually solve this problem if we would move past political calculations and think about what benefits the nation as a whole and the individuals and families caught in the middle of a broken system.
Dr. Land was also recently invited to join Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump’s Evangelical Advisory Board. He explains why he decided to accept this invitation here. I am encouraged that the types of perspectives on immigration that we explored in this podcast will be able to be spoken to Donald Trump and his team by Dr. Land and others. I am praying for Dr. Land and the other members of the Advisory Board that they would continue to be a voice for those who do not have a voice (Proverbs 31:8-9) and that this message will be able to get through.
To hear the 15 minute interview with Dr. Land, just click on the link to my post and scroll to the audio player on the bottom. Come back here and discuss what you think about it!
I think Dr. Land presents a biblical and reasonable opinion on the immigration issue. Certainly worth listening and considering.
His point on retroactive enforcement deserves more attention than it normally receives.
Agreed. on the retroactive statement and the “help wanted sign”. We have to enforce a border – even if that means – gasp – building some sort of wall and using more technology and personnel to catch as many crossers as we can – and consistently enforce laws already on the books and perhaps add some regarding enforcement of the border – Part of this has to be severely punishing employers who knowingly hire illegals (they are breaking immigration and employment laws as well!) – serious enforcement is the key. IMO, in “sealing the border” we gotta make illegal entry… Read more »
Comprehensive immigration plans will never 1) get bipartisan agreement – trying to do too much at one time 2) if something is cobbled through it will be terrible.
When the government tries to deal with huge matters like this “comprehensively” we get stupid monstrosities forced through by one party that do not work but make things worse like ObamaCare and countless other examples.
Tarheel, this situation is different, actually. You have to deal with it comprehensively because one issue affects another. Nothing is independent. It isn’t trying to create a monstrosity to deal with it all at once. It is recognizing the already present interrelated nature of the whole thing. That is what Dr. Land was saying. You can’t just break out one part and blame people for responding to the situation that was created by others over 50 years. That is neither just nor merciful. The problem with focusing on border security first is that security doesn’t just exist at the border.… Read more »
I understand what you’re saying and we are essentially in agreement. I guess I’m just saying that I think we should comprehensively deal with border security before we even consider what to do with those who broke our laws (those are already here). Otherwise I fear it won’t get done and we will continue to foster more and more illegal immigration – I agree with Dr. land that our Government failed us and immigrants by not enforcing the law for 50 years has created this mess. I think demonizing – and talking about any kind of mass deportation is ridiculous… Read more »
I’m kinda with Tarheel on this. I believe in a comprehensive approach, but until we prove that we are capable of achieving the border security, the pathway for citizenship conversation makes no sense at all. People will assume that the borders will still be insecure, droves will still be coming across, AND they will now have a pathway to become legal citizens, which is basically just the same situation we have now, only making everything legal. Forgive me for stating the obvious, but the issue of border security is YUGE!! Let’s show we can FIRST competently turn off the water… Read more »
Tarheel/Rick, I would point out that the facts show that illegal immigration is down from its height in 2007 by approximately a million people, more people are leaving the United States for Mexico than are coming here now (and this has been going on for a while), the Obama Administration has deported more people than any president in U.S. history (2.5 million), there are approximately 450,000 people in immigrant detention (more than in Federal prisons), the United States sends millions and millions of dollars a year to Mexico to help them with border security on their Southern Border with the… Read more »
I think we are hearing about it more now than in 2007 because: (a) problems are cumulative and grow larger as more people are affected, (b) the whole “sanctuary cities” debate, (c) it is an election year, (d) Trump is talking about securing our borders, and (e) general insecurity related to terrorists and the concern that they might infiltrate the ranks of refugees and immigrants coming to America. Regardless of the timing, if Dr. Land is right and we need to begin enforcing laws that we have not enforced in 50 years, we need to demonstrate some competence in doing… Read more »
I am all for securing the border and shutting down visa overstays. I don’t know why a kid who was brought here when he was 2 and is now 24 has to wait 5 years for the government to do that before he can start a lengthy process toward legalization, though. The man that we will hear from earned a degree in biochemistry from a prestigious university in California. He is brilliant and wants to go on and study for his Ph.D. He can’t do that because he cannot guarantee the schools that he is applying to that he won’t… Read more »
Because if the government cannot turn off the faucet, it makes no sense to run the water vac. Maybe it will only take three years. Maybe Dr. Land can reduce his thirteen year pathway to ten. Maybe a special provision can be made for literate English speaking undocumented aliens. But the pathway to citizenship must be tied to genuine border security and the restoration of immigration law enforcement. Otherwise, the plan becomes simple amnesty, and that is not really the plan Dr. Land is proposing and some of us are embracing.
It sounds like from what Alan has said, the government HAS been turning off the faucet. Illegal immigration peaked 8 years ago and has been coming down since.
Isn’t that what we want? Why the need for the wall NOW if what we are doing seems to be working, despite the alarmist rhetoric?
The people in Arizona, New Mexico, California, Texas and other border states are not as optimistic as Alan in pronouncing the problem practically solved. I don’t think most Americans consider what we are doing now to be working. Hence, the rhetoric making secure borders an issue. By the way, I think the issue has been raised for the past ten years or so. It is only now starting to get any traction because someone in the world of politics, he who like Voldemort must not be named, is listening.
Rick, “amnesty” for those here and border security would be two totally different things. I don’t really follow what you mean. 1. No one is promoting “amnesty.” Amnesty means that you just forgive everything and the slate is clean. Paying fines, back taxes, and entering into a process is not amnesty. Cruz accused the Gang of 8 and Rubio of promoting amnesty. That was a falsehood every time he said it. We have had around 11.3 – 11.5 illegal immigrants in America since 2011. That is a 5 year flat-line. Since we have legalized none who were here illegally, and… Read more »
I’m not saying it is practically solved. I am saying that anti-immigration reform advocates keep moving the goal posts.
It also comes down to whether you accept the stats coming out of the O admin.
Honestly, how much (on this or any other issue) has been disseminated out of that admin that we can actually believe?
Alan, I do not believe you are for amnesty. I was saying that if we provide a pathway for legal citizenship, but do nothing to curtail the overly large number of people immigrating here illegally, we only open the floodgates for more people to come in, thus breaking the law, and then becoming citizens, which perpetuates the cycle as it has existed for years, which is practically a form of “saying it’s all okay.” Amnesty means you forgive everything and the slate is clean, as you say. That’s basically what would happen if we don’t stop them from pouring in,… Read more »
Rick, I am all for both A and B. I just think we can do them both at the same time. Dr. Land said a lot of good things that are helpful to this conversation, I believe.
“I think we can do them both at the same time. Dr. Land said a lot of good things that are helpful to this conversation, I believe.” Alan, buddy. I admire your work on this issue – and as you know it’s been very helpful to me in thinking through these issues – with that said though: I agree strongly with your second sentence – and disagree just as strongly with your first. The government (leaders from both parties) have lost credibility on this issue because of the abject lack of willingness to actually enforce the law – so until… Read more »
Thanks for posting this, Alan. I think Dr. Land’s analysis, as usual, is outstanding. His solution appears balanced in that it (a) secures the border, (b) respects the rule of law, and (c) offers a pathway to citizenship for currently undocumented aliens over thirteen years if they are willing to obey our laws and learn to read, write and speak English. This makes more sense, I think, then broad scale deportation. Land is right that we need to take some ownership of the problem considering the fact that we have not been enforcing the law for the past fifty years.… Read more »
*than* broad scale deportation
Thanks, Rick! It was a great interview and I really liked the way he put things together. Dr. Land being one of the founders of the Evangelical Immigration Table along with Russell Moore continuing to affirm this work is what caused me to want to work on this issue with them. I truly believe that if Evangelicals can help solve this issue from a Biblical perspective along the lines that Dr. Land laid out here, we will be stronger as a nation, immigrants will benefit as will native born, families will be strengthened, the rule of law will be affirmed,… Read more »
And, Rick, I am in the Birmingham area a lot. We should talk about this more sometime. There are things we can do to work together to help make this happen. I’m also trying to encourage Alabama Baptist churches to engage in ministry to immigrants all over the state. This is a chance for us to “tell a better story.” I’d love to connect on this more. We often disagree on things, but it is like I have always told others here – in reality, we agree on 90% of things, primarily Christ crucified and the implications of that. Let’s… Read more »
“Immigration laws are the only laws that are discussed in terms of how to help people who break them.” -Thomas Sowell
I know this is a difficult and touchy issue.
But all sides should be seriously considered.
Any country should have the right to control its borders.
Most other countries do so; and strongly deal with those who violate their borders.
My heart goes out to those who wish to come to America.
But if everyone who wanted to come to America were allowed to do so, America would be swamped and be a radically different country.
David R. Brumbelow
I agree with the concept and believe in border security. That is not at issue here – at least in this discussion.
“Immigration laws are the only laws that are discussed in terms of how to help people who break them.” -Thomas Sowell That is a really simplistic quote and it is mostly wrong in its application. Here’s why: I have an interview coming up with a man who is 24 years old. He was brought here by his parents – without his consent – when he was 2 years old. For years, he had no idea that he was not here legally. He found out when he was a teenager, I believe. He has no memory of his home country. He… Read more »
David said: “But if everyone who wanted to come to America were allowed to do so, America would be swamped and be a radically different country.”
I agree with this statement.
However, I’d like to look at the other end of the scale, too.
If no low-skill immigrants who wanted to come to America were allowed to do so, we would all have to pay more money to people who provide less work and poorer service to us all. Maybe that’s what everyone else wants, but not me.
So, why was my comment deleted?
No idea. I didn’t do it. I did see it earlier, though. I’m used to being disagreed with strongly, so it didn’t bother me at all. 🙂
How are you, Joe? Well, I hope. It’s been a while.
Fine
It wasn’t directed at you, personally. I tried to make a point of making the comment general.
I did not take it personally. It is my post, so I was letting you know that I didn’t delete your comment in case you thought I had. It’s all good. Just wanting to clear that up.
Joe, if you want to engage with ideas and with people as brothers, then do. If the point of your comment is simply to tell everyone what liberals they are for not agreeing with you, well, frankly, we’ve heard that a million times. I deleted your comment because it was simply (in my mind) another angry Joe Blackmon rant about how everyone who disagrees with him is a liberal. Did I misread your comment? Look, I know you don’t like me. You don’t like Dr. Moore. You hate Marco Rubio. We get it. Point taken. But I’d like you just… Read more »
I will go back and look at the comment again. I admit that when I see a comment from you, Joe, I expect certain things. Did I read those in? I’ll look at it again.