tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7217199.post8953329339316402809..comments2024-03-24T11:30:08.199-07:00Comments on Can you believe?: "We were strangers once, too."Johan Maurerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13771067774042071617noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7217199.post-40272412676103057522014-11-23T15:54:11.704-08:002014-11-23T15:54:11.704-08:00Thank you for your article, Johan. I'm not ash...Thank you for your article, Johan. I'm not ashamed of Christ, but I'm ashamed of much of what American Christianity has become. Heaven forbid that the President should use Scripture to back up a humane solution to the immigration problem without first asking permission from the Republicans! I enjoyed this article on Patheos: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unfundamentalistchristians/2014/11/last-night-our-president-sounded-like-jesus/ Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7217199.post-56379070226534892272014-11-22T13:24:27.689-08:002014-11-22T13:24:27.689-08:00Thanks for thoughtful comments.
First of all, my ...Thanks for thoughtful comments.<br /><br />First of all, my blog is probably 100% opinion. Even if I claim something is a fact, you're probably getting my biased description or my evaluation. I never disguised my belief that President Bush's war was immoral, criminal, and evil. Maybe my calmer approach since then has led some people to think I don't have strong biases.<br /><br />Next, I didn't say that all those who oppose Obama's immigration proposals are xenophobes. I was referring to the sudden retreat from a bipartisan House of Representatives proposal after the defeat of Eric Cantor. It was the campaign against "softness" on immigration that seemed to have defeated him and frightened others. I am sure that among those who use the anti-foreigners card in politics are genuine xenophobes as well as others who simply exploit the issue for political gain, but to me the net effect is xenophobic. Of course it is possible that I'm giving more weight to the Politico article than I should--but readers are free to evaluate it for themselves.<br /><br />Am I guilty of drawing "we/they" lines in my blog post after criticizing others for doing so? I don't believe that "we" should be afraid of honest conflict within the community. People of goodwill can, for example, differ on the trade-offs between security and justice, and even have strong feelings about those differences. But we do not have the power to exclude or to deport. We may argue and struggle, but we remain "we."<br /><br />You are right to challenge intemperate language on my blog, and I hope you keep doing so. I appreciated <a href="http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/11/20/quote-for-the-day-433/" rel="nofollow">this page</a> on Andrew Sullivan's blog, and maybe should do more to show the same courtesy he advocates. Even so, I can't pretend to be even-handed when I see the outrageous lack of a wider and more humane perspective on the part of those who claim either Christian or patriotic righteousness.Johan Maurerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13771067774042071617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7217199.post-45004191092005737882014-11-21T18:50:05.321-08:002014-11-21T18:50:05.321-08:00I always appreciate your thoughtful pieces, Johan,...I always appreciate your thoughtful pieces, Johan, and I'm in agreement with your basic thesis here. It makes no sense to me that the right is going ballistic over the President's initiative on immigration policy. We can't deport millions at once, there has to be some kind of triage and his makes sense, the immigration courts are already choked, and so forth. What bothers me is the use of the nominative form when stating opinion. That is, pronouncing opinion as fact. For instance, "two ruinous wars." As a lifelong pacifist, of course I doubt the wisdom of these, as of any, wars. Ruinous? That's your opinion, yet you state it as fact. We can't know, for instance, what greater ruination might have occurred had these wars not taken place, in which case they could be considered a necessary evil by non-pacifists. Mainly, I'm concerned about the characterization of those who oppose Mr. Obama's new directives as xenophobes. I know you didn't say they all are. I personally doubt that very many are, which is where we differ it seems. Most people I know who hold the basic Republican view on immigration place the value "rule of law" over the value "compassion to those who come seeking a better life." It's not all one way or the other. They share the latter value. They see the former as more foundational. Perhaps my conservative friends don't represent the mainstream, but I suspect they do. Your posts are usually more even-handed, so I'm surprised this time to see more partisanship. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7217199.post-87918332247830023662014-11-21T15:34:24.067-08:002014-11-21T15:34:24.067-08:00Thanks for the affirmation!Thanks for the affirmation!Johan Maurerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13771067774042071617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7217199.post-88411848648976658542014-11-21T12:32:39.180-08:002014-11-21T12:32:39.180-08:00Thank you, Johan. Well said.Thank you, Johan. Well said.Mindful Searcherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16846738386766904946noreply@blogger.com