Immigration

Discerning What Is Best
with Dr. Rex M. Rogers

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 19 October 2026

Is what’s happening in Europe concerning to America?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #284 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Europe is in trouble. First in France, now in Belgium, Greece, the UK, Spain, Italy and other countries, students, activists, leftists, Marxists, agitators, labor unions, and simply thugs have taken to the streets by the thousands not in peaceful protests but destructive riots fighting police, burning schools and other buildings, looting, and waving flags—not national flags but Palestinian flags. Major news media describe this as student unrest regarding better education. It does not take much research or review to determine far more serious issues and organizations are involved than this, and the social turmoil is not going away anytime soon. Some pundits have wondered aloud about civil war.

Many people have been sounding warning bells for some time—actually, some have been issuing caveats since at least the 1990s and certainly since the 2010s.
But political elites, EU bureaucrats, leftists, globalists, and other sophisticates have paid no heed, and they’ve pursued their course with little input from the citizenry.

WWII devastated not only the landscape but the economies of European nations, especially, of course, Germany. Their economies were stymied for lack of workers due to the war and due in subsequent decades to an unsustainable low fertility rate that continues to this hour. Then, someone had the great idea of simply bringing in immigrants to become workers in European factories.

Within a decade or so, European leaders also embraced the misguided philosophy of multiculturalism – the idea that no culture is better than another – and then began inviting, importing, and welcoming immigrants, largely unvetted because to do much review is to violate the multicultural religion and become “racist” xenophobes. So, with Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel saying, “We can do this,” countries threw open their borders to first a few, then many, then unstoppable and often illegal waves of migrants mostly from lands formerly “colonized” back in another era.

The European leaders’ policy was called a “guest program” because they assumed immigrants would work for a time and then go home. That never happened.
Migrants stayed and began having more babies than generational Europeans.
Then European leaders assumed immigrants would integrate and assimilate, become loyal German or French or Belgium or Swedish, work hard and produce goods and services for the marketplace and produce a happily ever after for all. That never happened.

European leaders thought immigrants would quickly get jobs and earn their way. While some certainly did this and live peaceful, productive lives, the majority of immigrants in most countries proved to be “economic migrants.” They were not really refugees from a troubled country, now seeking a short-term hand-up. They were looking for a handout. They were people whose religious inclinations gave them an entitlement mentality expecting the foolish, irrationally generous welfare social democracies of Europe to pay their way. So now what? France, for one, is broke.

One key element European leaders missed, in what some have called an ignorant and others have called an arrogant, secular mindset, is the importance and relevance of religion. The post WWII Europeans secular mindset is characterized by a deep decline in traditional religious practice and institutional belonging, accelerated by trauma, modernization, and a shift toward individual freedom, i.e., materialism, humanism. “Christianity, which had long been the spiritual and moral cornerstone of Europe and much of the Western sphere, began a steady decline—both in influence and practice.”

Discarding Christianity comes at a cost—societal cohesion, spiritual fulfillment, and moral clarity remain elusive in an increasingly fragmented and polarized world. Without Christianity as a unifying force, Western societies became more pluralistic but also more fragmented. Secular liberalism, while promoting personal freedom, often struggles to provide the existential meaning that religion once offered. The void left by Christianity enabled the growth of radical ideologies. The transition from moral absolutes to liberal relativism eroded clear definitions of right and wrong.

With this secular mindset, European leaders failed to account for the religious views and values of waves of immigrants.These immigrants brought with them their religious values, their politics, their cultural practices and norms, and as importantly, their inbred, deep-seated animosity toward the West and the very countries that became their hosts.

Fast forward a couple of decades or more and now there are second and third generation children of migrants, youth born in Europe, who surveys and other research indicate are often more hostile to their host country than their parents. What happened to assimilation? What happened to happily ever after?

So now, in 2026, there are somewhere between 44-50 million immigrants in Europe. If these populations assimilate, then perhaps there is or will be no problem. But if they do not, as trends and recent events in Europe suggest, then predictions regarding Europe’s future range from not pretty to alarming.

Europe has sometimes served as America's early warning system: social and ideological changes that appear there first eventually cross the Atlantic. The open question is whether America will notice and act.

In virtually all European countries with significant immigrant populations terrorist incidents, violence, and crime have climbed significantly higher. The social freedoms of women in European communities have changed markedly in response to public harassment by immigrant men. Threats to the safety of women, including an enormous increase in rapes and trafficking perpetrated by immigrants.

European nation integration policies have been largely unsuccessful. The sheer number of unvetted immigrants flooding the continent threatens the financial viability of the socialist welfare states eager to “buy them off,” which only results in dependency and perceptions of the nation as weak. And this perception of weakness may not be incorrect, for Western European complacency, fear, or a lack of resolve are clearly in evidence.

What should Americans learn? One, we are in a brave new world in which mass migration is being weaponized as a tool of subversion. Then violent protests are encouraged by foreign governments.

Being smart about immigration is not ipso facto racism. Nor is it irrational or isolationist. Nor is it evidence of a lack of caring – America has been and still is the most generous country in the world. Wise immigration policy is simply good stewardship, to which some European countries are now, finally, awakening.

Citizen and government pushback against civilizational erasure is now happening, for example, in Italy, led by conservative Prime Minister Georgia Meloni, and believe or not, at EU headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, where the European Parliament recently passed a major migration reform package by a vote of 418 to 218, establishing stricter rules for deporting undocumented third-country nationals.

We do not know if it is “too late” to turn the tsunami we’re now witnessing in Europe. But it is categorically not too late to take steps in the US to do our best to prevent similar social fragmentation here.

What do we do?
1) Teach civics and American history in high schools, 2) Continue to deport illegal immigrants, 3) Suspend birth tourism, 4) Identify and deport individuals acting on radicalized ideology that threatens to undermine American freedoms. This is not a violation of the First Amendment.

President Dwight Eisenhower once wisely said, “To begin with: all of us—citizens, jurists, officials—must remember that the Bill of Rights contains no grant of privilege for a group of people to destroy the Bill of Rights. A group—like the Communist conspiracy—dedicated to the ultimate destruction of all civil liberties cannot be allowed to claim civil liberties as its privileged sanctuary from which to carry on subversion of the Government.”

God bless America.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. For more Christian commentary, see my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com, or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2026

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 07 September 2026

Immigration continues to be a flashpoint in American politics. Who, how many, how, and when should we allow immigrants to come to America?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #278 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

America has always been a nation of immigrants. But it is also a nation with borders, laws and a sovereign government responsible first to its own citizens. Those two facts are not contradictory.

The real question is whether America will have an immigration system that serves the national interest—or one that increasingly allows political, economic and humanitarian pressures to determine who enters and who remains. For decades, Washington has failed to answer that question. The fundamental problem is a breakdown of confidence in the immigration system.

Americans are told that immigration is legal, orderly and controlled while millions of people have entered or remained in the country unlawfully. The government has struggled to process asylum claims promptly, enforce deportation orders and prevent unauthorized employment. Even Americans who favor substantial legal immigration can—if they’re honest—reasonably conclude that a system unable to enforce its own laws is not functioning properly.

America needs an immigration policy that begins with secure borders and enforcement of existing law. Border security is not an expression of hostility toward foreigners. Every sovereign nation has the right to determine who enters its territory. The United States should know who is entering, why they are entering, whether they are legally entitled to remain, and whether they pose a security or criminal threat.

There is also an economic dimension. Historically, immigrants strengthened America when they filled genuine labor shortages, created businesses, developed new technologies and contributed more taxes than they consumed in public benefits.

But immigration is not cost-free. Rapid population growth can increase demand for housing, schools, health care and other public services. Americans competing for lower-skilled jobs can also reasonably ask whether immigration levels are contributing to downward pressure on wages in particular industries. The answer should not be to stop legal immigration. It should be to make legal immigration work for America.

That means establishing immigration levels according to national economic needs rather than treating ever-increasing immigration as an automatic virtue. It means giving consideration to skills, education, employment prospects and the ability of immigrants to become self-supporting. It means enforcing employment laws so that businesses cannot gain a competitive advantage by hiring unauthorized workers. It also means expecting assimilation, and this assumes immigrants want to assimilate, want to work, and want to pursue the American Dream.

America historically offered immigrants something extraordinary: the opportunity to become Americans. That required more than physical residence. It involved learning English, understanding American history and government, accepting constitutional principles regarding life, law, and freedom, and participating in a common civic culture. America can welcome people from virtually every nation while still insisting that citizenship carries responsibilities and that the United States has a national identity worth preserving.

The asylum system deserves scrutiny. Genuine refugees fleeing persecution deserve protection. But asylum should not become a substitute for ordinary immigration or a mechanism by which people enter illegally and then remain for years while their claims are adjudicated. The longer the government takes to decide cases, the more difficult and expensive enforcement becomes.

The same principle applies to legalization. America should be extremely cautious about another mass amnesty. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 legalized millions of undocumented immigrants while attempting to strengthen enforcement. Critics contend that enforcement did not ultimately match the promise, leaving the country vulnerable to another wave of illegal immigration.
That history helps explain why many Americans now insist that enforcement must come first.

There is no shortage of possible reforms: secure the border, expand immigration courts, accelerate asylum decisions, require effective employment verification, remove criminals and others without a legal basis to remain, reform legal immigration categories, discourage welfare-dependent immigration and strengthen assimilation.
There is another fast emerging but still largely ignored problem re immigration—the increasing number of Islamic immigrants coming to America is not healthy for America long-term. Making this statement is not racist—Muslims represent virtually every country, race, and ethnicity on earth.

The question is about religious values and whether those values reinforce or tear down the American system. Making this statement is not ipso facto a violation of the First Amendment. Yes, Islam is a religion, but it is unlike any other religion on earth. It is equally and thoroughly a political ideology and a civilizational worldview demanding territorial and religious dominance wherever it exists.

This comes at a time when America, and indeed the West, seem to have lost confidence our nation, it’s heritage and values, and in its meaning. Fueled by encouragement from the left and many in media, Americans are wallowing in a kind of self-loathing, i.e., that nothing we ever did was valuable and certainly Western civilization is no better and maybe worse than all other civilizations, especially now Islamic. But this is revisionist history, the product of leftist neo-Marxist propaganda, and damaging, maybe deadly, in its impact upon American prospects and prosperity.

I address these and other considerations pertinent to the health of the American system in my new book, “We Hold These Truths”—Responsible Christian Patriotism. Islamism, which is often defined as Islamic extremism, is a direct threat to the future freedom and well-being of America. If you don’t believe me, do some reading about what is taking place in Europe where Islamists immigrants are rapidly overwhelming Europe’s heritage and culture. It can happen here.

So why hasn’t Congress acted? Because immigration is politically useful to both parties.

Republicans can campaign on border security and the rule of law. Democrats can campaign against what they regard as excessive enforcement and deportation. Each party has constituencies that punish its leaders for compromising. The result is predictable: politicians can obtain political benefits from the immigration controversy without accepting the risks of solving it.

The political landscape in 2026 makes a comprehensive bargain particularly difficult. Border encounters have fallen dramatically under the Trump administration, yet the immigration issue remains deeply polarizing. Pew Research found that 60% of Republicans still regard illegal immigration as a big national problem in April 2026, compared with only 17% of Democrats. At the same time, Americans are not uniformly supportive of every restrictive policy; for example, a January 2026 Pew survey found substantial support for a large military presence at the southern border but majority opposition to suspending all asylum applications. That combination makes compromise difficult.

Republicans have little incentive to surrender the political advantage of emphasizing enforcement, while Democrats have little incentive to provide Republicans with a legislative victory on an issue that divides their coalition. Recent Democratic debate over whether ICE should be abolished or reformed demonstrates that the party itself remains divided over the proper role of immigration enforcement.

America can remain generous without being careless. It can welcome legal immigrants without accepting illegal entry. It can enforce its borders without abandoning compassion.

It can even restrict, limit, or ban certain individuals who wish to come to America as a kind of fifth column or cell to work to undermine and ultimately to destroy the American system. As President Eisenhower once said, “the Bill of Rights contains no grant of privilege for a group of people to destroy the Bill of Rights.”

A government elected by the American people has a responsibility to “establish Justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”

That is not anti-immigrant. It is what a free government of laws and a sovereign nation must do.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best.

If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. For more Christian commentary, see my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com, or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 10 February 2025

Should children born in the United States to illegal immigrants automatically become American citizens?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #191 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

“The question of who is entitled to U.S. citizenship is most often raised during debates over illegal immigration. While most of the debate turns on the question of who can become a citizen through legalization and naturalization, some groups argue that the way to end illegal immigration is to change the rules of the game by denying citizenship to the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants.”

“January 20, 2025, President Donald J. Trump issued an executive order, titled ‘Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,’ which said that the federal government will not ‘issue documents recognizing United States citizenship” to any children born on American soil to parents who were in the country unlawfully or were in the states lawfully but temporarily.”

In short order, US District Judge Deborah Boardman blocked this executive order, saying “it’s likely unconstitutional and “runs counter to our nation’s 250-year history of citizenship by birth.” Another legal scholar, Joseph Mead said, “For well over a century, the 14th Amendment has been understood to guarantee citizenship to all persons born in the United States.”

“Eric Hamilton, a lawyer representing the Trump administration, argued that the framers of the 14th Amendment did not intend to ‘create a loophole to be exploited’ by temporary visitors or undocumented immigrants.’”

Among the problems with birthright citizenship in recent years is something called birth tourism. “Birth tourism is the practice of traveling to another country or city for the purpose of giving birth in that country. The main reason for birth tourism is to obtain citizenship for the child in a country with birthright citizenship (jus soli).

Such a child is sometimes called an ‘anchor baby’ if their citizenship is intended to help their parents obtain permanent residency in the country. Other reasons for birth tourism include access to public schooling, healthcare, sponsorship for the parents in the future, hedge against corruption and political instability in the children’s home country.”

“Numerous ‘maternity businesses’ advise pregnant mothers to hide their pregnancies from officials and commit visa fraud—lying to customs agents about their true purpose in the U.S. Once they give birth, several 'birth tourism' agencies aid the mothers in defrauding the U.S. hospital, taking advantage of discounts reserved for impoverished American mothers.”

“United States citizenship can be acquired by birthright in two situations: by virtue of the person's birth within United States territory (jus soli) or because at least one of their parents was a U.S. citizen at the time of the person's birth (jus sanguinis). Birthright citizenship contrasts with citizenship acquired in other ways, for example by naturalization.”

Birthright citizenship is explicitly guaranteed to anyone born under the legal "jurisdiction" of the U.S. federal government by the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (adopted July 9, 1868), which states:

‘All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.’

“The term ‘jurisdiction’ was carefully chosen to intentionally exclude U.S.-born children of foreign diplomats and Native Americans living under tribal sovereignty.”

“It was necessary to include the citizenship clause in the Fourteenth Amendment because the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision of 1857 had denied citizenship to the children of slaves.”

So, upon initial quick review, it sounds like the Trump Administration is assailing a sacred and historic American ideal…and admittedly, it’s close. Citizenship is a precious gift, not known to millions in history past who were serfs or subjects of their kingdoms, not always protected by authoritarian regimes even today, and a key part of what is means to be an American.

We all know Emma Lazarus’s famous lines from the base of the Statue of Liberty: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” These immortal words were taken from her sonnet, New Colossus. The words immediately became a “powerful portrayal of the United States as a beacon of hope, freedom, and opportunity for those seeking a new life. The poem captures the essence of the Statue of Liberty as a welcoming symbol and reflects the American ideals that have shaped the nation's history and identity.”

Immigration and citizenship, including birthright citizenship, are a part of this American Dream. All our ancestors were immigrants at some point in time. With few exceptions like the progeny of foreign ambassadors, the children born on American soil, at least since the 14^th Amendment in 1868, have been granted American citizenship. Now suddenly, the United States seems to be turning its back on this deeply embedded ideal.

But before we proceed, what we need is perspective. “How many other countries have birthright citizenship? How many such children are there in the United States, and how much is this costing us? The Center for Immigration Studies released a study by Jon Feere that gives some answers.”

Listen to this. “The “overwhelming majority of the world’s countries do not offer automatic citizenship to everyone born within their borders. Only 30 countries out of 194 offer automatic citizenship. Of the 31 counties listed on the International Monetary Fund’s list of advanced economies, only the United States and Canada grant automatic birthright citizenship.”

What countries do not offer automatic birthright citizenship? Most of Europe: United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, all the Scandinavian countries, Switzerland. Most of Asia and the Middle east: China, India, Japan, South Korea, Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Egypt. Then add Australia and New Zealand. So, the Trump 2.0 Administration is not considering something out of the box or ipso facto anti-humanitarian, much less racist.

“Nobody is talking about repealing the 14th Amendment, or taking away anyone's citizenship. Nor must we amend the Constitution. But Court needs to clarify the extent of birthright citizenship. It should do so as part of a clear and meaningful policy concerning immigration, naturalization, and citizenship that is consistent with the core principles and highest ideals of the United States.”

“And the hundreds of thousands of such children (born here to illegals) are no accident. Many of them are the result of a deliberate effort by illegal aliens and foreign tourists to exploit our law and use these children to keep themselves in the country. Such children provide access to welfare benefits that would otherwise be off-limits to the parents and can ‘ultimately initiate chain migration of the child’s extended family and in-laws.’”

“CIS estimates that 40% of illegal alien households nationwide receive some type of welfare despite federal prohibitions. That rate is even higher in states with larger numbers of illegal aliens such as New York (49%), California (48%), and Texas (44%). Contrast that very high rate with the fact that only 19% of households headed by a native-born citizen receive welfare benefits. Birthright citizenship is not mandated by the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court has never held that children born of individuals who are in the United States illegally are citizens — only that the children of individuals who are born to legal permanent residents are citizens.”

So, birthright citizenship is a policy that should be administered in a manner that protects and reinforces the ideals and well-being of American interest and citizens.

Altering it is not a sin, nor does it mean Americans suddenly reject legal immigration or will make citizenship off-limits to their children.

I am not against birthright citizenship, nor do I want to see it eradicated, only legally administered in a manner that avoids fraud, discourages willful abuse of the system and its intent by birth tourists, implemented in a way that respects naturalization, and preserves the beauty and blessing of citizenship for all who qualify.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. Or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers for more podcasts and video.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://x.com/RexMRogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 27 January 2025

Is deportation of illegal immigrants morally justifiable?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #189 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Immigrants and immigration are part of the warp and woof of the American nation state. In a very real sense, there would be no United States of America without immigration. Yet today we are embroiled in a major, costly, political problem involving not simply immigrants but unvetted illegal immigrants.

I’ve talked about immigration in several podcasts.

The Immigrant Problem

Immigrant Qua Cultural Enricher

Western Nations and Mass Immigration

Love Your Neighbor—Immigrants Too?

Are Nation States Legitimate?

Before I proceed, let’s pause for a few qualifiers.

I am not taking a position against immigration, nor am I anti-immigrant. When I say this, I mean individuals who have come to America via a legal process. I have friends who fit this definition, people who came from other countries, worked for a time with a Green Card, and in the requisite period, applied for and attained their American citizenship. Bravo to them.

Our problem today are not these legal immigrants who worked the process and became American citizens. Our problem involves millions illegal or undocumented immigrants, many of whom it seems have not come to assimilate and pursue the American Dream, but to seek entitlements and apparently to prey on those around them.

So, when I say we have a major political problem relating to immigrants I am talking about illegals.

“As of January 2024, more than 7.2 million migrants had illegally crossed into the U.S. over the Southwest border during U.S. President Joe Biden's administration — a number higher than the individual populations of 36 states.” Other listings cite as high as 11 million migrants illegally entering the U.S. during the Biden Administration. Mr. Biden opened the floodgates his first day in office in 2021with executive orders that overturned the previous Trump Administration’s policies, like Stay in Mexico, and stopped work on the border wall. And, then the Biden Administration and so-called Progressives allowed illegals to flood the border, even employing night flights of illegal immigrants around the country, forcing state law enforcement to stand down, and more.

Since that time, several cities like New York, Chicago, Denver have spent billions of dollars on illegal immigrants, coopted schools and hotels to house illegal immigrants, spent millions on food credit cards, free cell phones or insurance, inexplicably refused to prosecute illegals involved in crimes against property and even rape and murder.

Now the Trump 2.0 Administration is closing the border and plans to deport, as necessary, millions of illegal immigrants. This, of course, has produced reaction: some 54% of Americans support mass deportation, while others, Democrats, Progressives, social justice advocates, cry fascism and say Trump and those who support his efforts lack compassion, or worse.

Why President Joe Biden, and why most Western European nations, opened borders in the past few years to mass immigration is at this point murky at best.

One reason is a philosophy called Multiculturalism, which wedded to the leftist progressive Democrat desire for political power is at work in the U.S. The last few years’ influx across the open southern border of unvetted, unauthorized, mostly male military-age migrants is now producing predictable, social fragmentation, unrest, and dangerous circumstances in American cities.

“The events on the border are not a humanitarian crisis but a political one…What’s at stake is whether or not laws apply to citizens and foreigners alike. Biden believes that the law should only apply to the former; Trump, to both…People often say, ‘the system is broken’ and call for new laws, but the legal framework isn’t broken, it’s ignored. It’s ignored because various people with power benefit from the chaos politically and economically.”

Meanwhile, many Christian leaders argue it would be wrong for the U.S. to consider closing borders or curtailing immigration because to do so is to not love our neighbors or not welcome strangers. So, this view states that to close borders, restrict immigration, and certainly to deport illegals, is to act in a non-loving, non-Christian manner.

Recently, “Pope Francis said Donald Trump’s plans to impose mass deportations of immigrants would be a ‘disgrace,’ as he weighed in on the incoming U.S. president’s pledges nearly a decade after calling him ‘not Christian’ for wanting to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border.” Interestingly, the Pope failed to mention the walls that surround Vatican City.

Author Megan Basham observed, the United States should welcome ‘huddled masses yearning to breathe free’ to share in the blessings God has bestowed on us. But if we incentivize illegal immigration by rewarding those who ignore our laws and fail to ensure that those to whom we grant citizenship understand and respect our founding ideals that made the nation great, the United States will soon look little different from the countries these immigrants are fleeing.

So, deportation is one approach to correcting what many consider an unsurvivable wave of mass immigration.

Deportation of illegal immigrants is nothing new. The first U.S. presidential administration to order the deportation of illegal immigrants was that John Adams, the second President of the United States. All U.S. president administrations have deported unauthorized non-citizens. Recently, George W Bush deported 2 million, Obama 2.8 million, Trump 1 766,373, and Biden 1.1 million.

Is deportation of illegal immigrants morally justifiable and why?

National sovereignty, including self-determination of identity and who may live here, is part of citizenship, and without citizenship, there is loss of freedom.
For a nation-state to exist, it must maintain territorial boundaries that are recognized by other nation-states. No borders, no identity, no nation-state. No nation-state, no common purpose or accomplishments, and likely no security.

Deportation is a legitimate means, not an intrinsically evil act,of protecting the common good, of protecting culture and safety, of advancing e Pluribus Unum based on a desire to assimilate, while upholding the dignity of each human person.
“The reason for the deportationremains that(illegal immigrants) have no right to be in the country to begin with…This follows the basic principle of equivalence in moral justice: the punishment should be calibrated to offset the crime, and should not impose suffering that exceeds that caused by the violation. Deportation merely reverses the harm caused by the person who entered illegally. And if you acknowledge that illegal immigration has negative effects on American citizens – particularly the most vulnerable ones – justice and morality demand that we offer them redress…When illegal immigrants are allowed to work, to make use of public schools, to get drivers’ licenses, to receive in-state tuition at our universities, to receive medical care at the cost of American citizens, to collect welfare assistance, and indeed, in some cases, even to vote…what benefits remain the sole privilege of citizens? We owe it to all citizens – especially the most vulnerable, who are most affected by the mass importation of impoverished, uninvited foreigners – to restore the value of citizenship.”

Considerations of national and local security. “The lesson of the last 20 years of immigration policy is that lawlessness breeds more lawlessness. Once a people or government decide to normalize one form of lawbreaking, other forms of lawlessness will follow until finally the rule of law itself is in profound jeopardy…Immigration is not a service we provide to the rest of the world. Yes, we are a nation of immigrants and will continue to be. No other country welcomes as many newcomers. But rewarding illegal immigration does an injustice to the many legal immigrants who played by the rules to get here.”

To continue as we are now with open borders is to destroy America’s position as a beacon of hope to the world.

So, the U.S. must develop immigration policy that protects and preserves American ideals and identity, rule of law, and borders so that the nation may survive and meet the needs of its citizens, and the U.S. must develop immigration policy that provides a legal, orderly, just path for those who desire freedom and opportunity to become Americans. Both these conditions empower us to love our neighbors.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 02 September 2024

We’re commanded in Scripture to love our neighbor as ourselves, but does this include migrants, even illegal immigrants, too?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #167 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Immigration is a major, divisive, and urgent topic in the United States, especially relative to the 2024 presidential election.

“The unauthorized immigrant population in the United States grew to 11.0 million in 2022, according to Pew Research Center estimates,” about 3.3% of the total U.S. population. “Meanwhile, the lawful immigrant population grew steadily from 24.1 million in 2000 to 36.9 million in 2022,” about 14.3% of the nation’s population.

Whatever one’s political views about US immigration policy, there are about 11M unauthorized and about 37M lawful immigrants in the US.

We can think about immigrants on many levels, but we’ll focus upon two here: personal or individual, and political or national.

First the personal.

In Scripture, Jesus said to love your neighbor as yourself (Luke 10:25-28), a pretty tall order. A lawyer, seeking clarity, asked Jesus, “Who is my neighbor?” and Jesus responded with the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

In this parable a man is accosted and beaten by robbers and left half-dead alongside the road. A priest passes by but does not help, then a Levite does the same. Finally, a Samaritan—someone whose ethnic identity is not well-regarded by Judeans—sees the beaten man and has compassion on him, taking steps to restore his health. Jesus asks, “Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” The lawyer said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise” (Luke 10:25-37).

Love our neighbor does not mean we must agree and certainly not endorse wrong or evil belief or practices. It does not mean we do not evaluate or make judgements about good, bad, or ugly culture. It means we love the person. It includes compassion, honesty, impartiality, and justice in our relationships

Jesus taught that we are to love those not like us, those who may not be able to love in return, those who are unlovely – in other words, other human beings.

How do we love our neighbors, immigrant, authorized or unauthorized?

Remember, they likely have experienced estrangement, anxiety, fear, lack of resources, feeling unwelcome. They may feel isolated and alone, sort of lonely in a crowd, because they are detached from family and familiar culture, including language, food, ways of life.

Build bridges, try to build common ground, show the love of Christ, help with language barriers like understanding idioms, be a friend, evangelize indirectly. Talk about life challenges and God but not forcing a decision. Ask if they know much about churches or Christianity. Talk about what Jesus or your faith means to you, how it affects your daily life.

Now, is it possible to be “pro-immigrant” – not so much as a political position but as a Christian or spiritual one, and if so, what does this mean?

Sure, pro-immigrant just means pro-people from another country, just like our ancestors. Legal immigration brings the U.S. new talent, able-bodied workers, new ideas, enriches us. Realize that whatever the problems of our immigration policies, there are all kinds of immigrants. Some may indeed be criminal and dangerous, or political agitators, but many are just families who truly hunger for asylum, freedom, opportunity, and a better life – just like the 2.5M who came through Ellis Island in the 20^th Century.

Now let’s consider the political.

America has been described as “a nation of immigrants,” yet today immigration is a major tension point in American politics.

But think about this: illegal immigration and open borders are the problem, not so much the idea of being an immigrant as such.

The biblical doctrine, “Love your neighbor” has been co-opted by progressive ideologues in their effort to reduce conservative resistance to progressive views.

These often-anti-Christian advocates work to redefine religious words, then employ them for social justice purposes. This is now happening with “Love your neighbor,” wherein we’re told that one must maintain open borders for to do otherwise is to not love our neighbor.

Among those working hardest to promote open borders are certain elites, meaning typically wealthy, progressive, transnational and political people who think of themselves as “world citizens” or “globalists.” Perhaps they are best-known in their association with the annual Davos, Switzerland confab, the World Economic Forum, wherein they pontificate on climate change, population control, world health, immigration, and technocratic global governance.

Globalists or progressives frequently cite something called “multiculturalism,” a view that all cultures are morally relative and thus not subject to evaluation. They promote open borders and wink at cultural and religious differences, arguing no moral distinctions can be made. This morally relativistic multicultural philosophy is one of the roots of the problems in the non-assimilation, social fracturing, crime and unrest, and street demonstrations we are now witnessing throughout Europe.

Germany embraced this philosophy and is now learning the hard way: open border mass immigration promoted as a culturally neutral economic boon yields social and cultural chaos.

Now the same multicultural philosophy, wedded to the leftist progressive Democrat desire for political power is at work in the U.S. The last few years’ influx across the open southern border of unvetted, unauthorized, mostly male migrants is now producing predictable, similar social fragmentation, unrest, and dangerous circumstances in American cities.

Meanwhile, many Christian leaders argue it would be wrong for the U.S. to consider closing borders or curtailing immigration because to do so is to not love our neighbors or not welcome strangers.

But author Eric Metaxas said, “It’s disturbing that some Christians seem quite happy to twist the scripture that says we are to ‘care for the strangers and aliens among us’ into a carte blanche invitation to enact dramatically destructive immigration policies, as though painting a smiley face over the monstrous reality of encouraging vicious drug cartels and child-sex traffickers. It’s hard to overstate the blasphemy of using God’s Word in this way.”

Author Megan Basham observed, “Of course, believers are to preach Christ crucified to all, no matter how they arrived here. Of course, we should provide for those in real need, no matter how the needy came to cross our path. But ‘welcome the stranger’ was Christ’s command to his followers to personally emulate the Good Samaritan. To insist that it was meant to be used as a blanket immigration policy is spiritual manipulation that cheapens its meaning.”

“The United States should and always has welcomed ‘huddled masses yearning to breathe free’ to share in the blessings God has bestowed on us. But if we incentivize illegal immigration by rewarding those who ignore our laws and fail to ensure that those to whom we grant citizenship understand and respect our founding ideals that made the nation great, the United States will soon look little different from the countries these immigrants are fleeing.”

So, on a personal, individual level, we must love our immigrant neighbors no matter how they got here. This means ignore politics and ideology, build bridges, pray for them, minister to them.

On a political, national level, the U.S., to continue as we are now with open borders is to destroy America’s position as a beacon of hope to the world.

So, the U.S. must develop immigration policy that first, protects and preserves American ideals and identity, rule of law, and borders so that the nation may survive and meet the needs of its citizens, and second, the U.S. must develop immigration policy that provides a legal, orderly, just path for those who desire freedom and opportunity to become Americans.

Both these conditions empower us to love our neighbors.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. Or check //www.youtube.com/@DrRexRogers">my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers for more podcasts and video.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 22 July 2024

Why are Western European nations, Canada, and the United States opening their borders to mass immigration?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #160 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

The first day President Joe Biden took office in January 2021, he signed executive orders changing United States policy regarding immigrants, opening the southern border to a free flow of illegal migrants that have walked or swam into the US every day since.

President Biden’s actions regarding illegal immigrants, which he has enlarged and enhanced repeatedly since, is a conscious decision to defy and ignore the laws of these United States. In other words, lawlessness began in and has continued from the Oval Office.

“As of January 2024, more than 7.2 million migrants had illegally crossed into the U.S. over the Southwest border during U.S. President Joe Biden's administration — a number higher than the individual populations of 36 states.” Illegal immigration is literally changing the American political landscape, threatening the wellbeing and security of American citizens, and, Mr. Biden hopes, building a new base of voters for his socialist views.

Immigration has, therefore, become a major issue in the 2024 presidential election campaign.

Why?

Illegal migrants break the law as their first act entering the U.S.
Migrants are shipped to cities like Denver, Chicago, NYC in numbers that now far outstrip the cities’ financial and functional capacity to handle them.
Migrants are often “fake refugees,” coming not to learn the language and culture and assimilate but to demand freebie entitlements including phones, hotel rooms, food, drivers’ license, insurance, even abortions.
Insofar as migrants work, and thousands do not, they are taking jobs from American citizens.
Migrants who do not want to assimilate, which appears to be many if not most of them, not only in the U.S. but in Western European countries, are unhappy, angry, make religious demands, engage in higher levels of crime.
Some migrants—difficult to tell how many—are religious zealots coming to America with plans to agitate, riot, and otherwise create mayhem, as they are presently doing in European cities, in an intentional effort to disrupt what they consider the Great Satan society.

“Borders globally (are supposed to) serve as the demarcation lines that define the territories of countries, signifying sovereignty and control. In essence, an open border is one where people can come and go without restrictions.”

Let me be clear. I am not opposed to immigration or immigrants but to open border illegal immigration.

“Those (like me who are) opposed to open border policies argue that an influx of migration risks overwhelming public services, cities face the risk of over-population and some experts say migration presents a security risk.”

Western nations have been opening borders to increased immigration for a variety of reasons, including:

Economic Growth: Theoretically, immigrants can help fill labor shortages in various sectors, from high-tech industries to agriculture. They could contributeto economic growth by providing labor, starting businesses, and paying taxes.
Demographic Challenges: Many Western countries face aging populations and declining birth rates. Supposedly, immigration helps counteract these trends by bringing in younger workers who can support aging populations through their labor and contributions to social security systems.
Cultural Diversity and Innovation: Immigrants bring diverse perspectives and skills, which can lead to greater innovation and cultural enrichment. Diverse societies are often more dynamic and adaptable.
Humanitarian Responsibilities: Western nations often have commitments to accept refugees and asylum seekers fleeing war, persecution, and natural disasters. This is both called a moral obligation and a requirement under international law, yet many countries of the world take in no immigrants at all.
Globalization and International Relations: As global interconnectivity increases, immigration policies can reflect broader geopolitical strategies and relationships with other countries.
Addressing Labor Market Needs: Certain industries in Western countries rely heavily on immigrant labor, for example, healthcare, construction, and agriculture.
Legal and Ethical Considerations: Many Western nations have legal frameworks that protect the rights of immigrants and promote family reunification, which can lead to higher immigration numbers.

Multiculturalism has significantly influenced Western nations' approach to mass immigration by shaping policies and attitudes towards cultural diversity and inclusion.

Cultural Enrichment: Multiculturalism promotes the idea that cultural diversity enriches society by introducing a variety of perspectives, traditions, and practices. This belief has led to more open attitudes towards accepting immigrants from diverse backgrounds.
Social Cohesion: Multiculturalism emphasizes the importance of social cohesion through the integration of diverse groups. It encourages mutual respect and understanding, which helps create a more welcoming environment for immigrants.
Human Rights and Equality: Multiculturalism is often linked with human rights and the idea that all individuals, regardless of their background, should have equal opportunities.
Economic Benefits: Embracing multiculturalism is seen as a way to leverage the economic benefits of immigration. Diverse workforces are often more innovative and better able to compete in a globalized economy.

While multiculturalism may have played a positive role in shaping immigration policies, it is also met with challenges and criticisms. Debates continue over the balance between celebrating diversity and maintaining social cohesion, the impact of immigration on national identity, and the best ways to integrate newcomers into society.

Why then are Western nations opening their borders in what looks like an irrational form of cultural or national suicide?

As I noted earlier, “over much of the world, birth rates are plunging and populations are ageing. This means that there will be fewer workers to support older people and growth. And this means that most countries will increasingly need to rely on migration.”
Western nations, beginning with Germany, bought into the idea of multiculturalism, a misguided philosophy that claims all cultures are relative, meaning none are better or worse than others. The reunification of Germany in 1990 and subsequent policies, including the 2000 Immigration Act, marked a more open approach to immigration.
Western nations also embraced moral relativism, meaning truth cannot be identified, nor can better or best, right or wrong, thus the host nations neutered themselves with no ability to enforce their own laws or stop illicit behaviors like groping women in the streets.
Western nations opened borders to people whose beliefs and values did not align with the host country, who did not really want to assimilate by learning the language or adopting mores and traditions, who rather wished to balkanize into their own ghettoes, who brought with them pagan outlooks on male/female relationships, family, and work, none of which matched the host society, and which generated reaction and division, which true believers in multiculturalism then labeled racism.
Migrants arrived from largely Muslim countries which share few to no values in common with Western culture. These new Muslim migrants used the religious liberty of the host countries to promote their own anti-freedom religious views as understood in Sharia law, and often orchestrated provocative in-the-street mass praying toward Mecca, blocking pedestrian and vehicle traffic. Their motives were not religious or personal freedom as much as social domination and economic entitlement.

On balance, the wholesale embrace of open borders, mass immigration, the false teaching of multiculturalism and moral relativism, have resulted not in economic boom but social chaos and unrest, ongoing protests, inter-tribal street-level infighting, residents vs new arrivals, religious tension, and the very real possibility that Western European nations are in the act of committing national and cultural suicide.

Meanwhile, immigrants who seek admission legally are subjected to higher costs and often delayed indefinitely.

This is not racism to say this. It is objectively true, and under the current Administration’s policies, the U.S. may not be far behind the turmoil of Western Europe.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://twitter.com/RexMRogers.