You May Say 'I'm a Dreamer'

A little over half a year ago, there was a bit of a hubbub over something that President Trump did. Not very surprising; it seems his every word generates some form of hubbub. Usually, it amounts to the opposition crying that this that or the other will destroy life as we know it for Americans.

This time, though, there was an outcry from his opposition that it would destroy life as we know it for non-Americans.

What he did was give a deadline of March 6th for Congress to agree on a legislation to replace the Presidential order of his predecessor called DACA, or “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.” Basically this meant that Congress had six months to get their act together or else, a large number of illegal immigrants who crossed the border as minors would be in danger of deportation.

That deadline came, and that deadline went, and it seems like nobody noticed. With the Oscars flopping two days before, and National Women’s Day two days after, it may be understandable that this less spectacular event fell largely by the wayside.

In any case, this got me thinking about a few things.

I’ve been thinking about citizenship law. Recently (and by that, I mean “in the past few years”… And by “in the past few years,” I mean “continuously since the 18th century”), there has been talk about giving non-citizens voting rights. This idea does not set well with me, because what is a government for, if not to protect its citizens from non-citizens and other foreigners?

I’ve been thinking that in ancient times, countries were pretty well established, but they didn’t have such strong border control, and movement between the countries was easy. How did they deal with that in those days?

Well, for the most part, they didn’t have democracy. But that didn’t change the idea that the government was to protect its citizens from foreign threat. Biblically speaking, there were three citizenship statuses that any person could enjoy. This is best shown by the law:

You shall not eat anything that has died naturally. You may give it to the sojourner who is within your towns, that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner.

Deuteronomy 14:21a

So the natural born citizens (Jews) had one regulation, and they were to treat “sojourners” (naturalized citizens) one way, but the “foreigners” (non-citizens) differently. And yes, they are different words in the Hebrew.

It really makes sense if you think about it. The citizens had accepted the law (similarly to our constitution), and by extension its values, as their birthright, and the non-citizens hadn't. Why give those with different values the opportunity to impact the people who base their lives on those values?

I will probably explore this topic a bit more in depth later, but I thought this was informative, and brings up some good questions for me to look at later.

But what do I know?

I’m Thinking Blessed.