Things Everyone Knows: Ripping Families Apart is Wrong

Earlier today, I wrote about the Trump administration's latest policy shift that attempts to limit illegal immigration; namely, taking children away from parents who come to America illegally, or even those who (legally) come to America seeking asylum.

Naturally, I thought it goes without saying that such a policy is morally bankrupt in all circumstances, but reality soon asserted itself.  Of course there is a small but determined group of dead-enders who steadfastly support the policy, on the grounds that anyone who comes to America illegally must suffer the consequences, even if that means the loss of their children.  So for the benefit of those who need the clarification, I'll explain why this policy is deeply immoral.

The most obvious reason is that even if the parents may have broken the law, the child has not. So separating a child from her parent not only punishes the child for a crime she didn't commit, her punishment may be much harsher than the one the parent suffers, given that as of this writing, roughly 20% of all children in the hands of federal sponsors simply vanish, many of them likely into the hands of human traffickers.

So yes, destroying the life of an innocent child is immoral. Do I really need to continue?

The next most obvious problem with the idea that 'criminals deserve what they get' is that quite often, the parent giving up her child is also innocent. As Chris Hayes reported, this policy targets asylum-seekers as well as illegal immigrants, even though it is not illegal to come the U.S. seeking asylum.

So yes, destroying the lives of an innocent child AND his mother is immoral. Shall I go on?

Fine. Now I've never met you, so I don't know what religious beliefs you might have, if any. So I'll simply point out that most (if not all) of the world's religions teach kindness and generosity toward immigrants, not authoritarian horror. For example:

• If you're Christian: "When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. (Leviticus 19:33-34)"
• If you're Jewish, then the above Leviticus quote applies equally to you, but there's also this: "whether we decide as Americans through the political process to open our arms or arm the gates, as Jews the message is clear: those struggling to leave the place of their birth and find freedom and security and opportunity in a new land are human beings. There is no 'us' and 'them.' They are God’s children. They are our brothers and sisters."
• If you're Muslim: The people of Madinah would later be given the title of “The Helpers” because, ultimately as the verse from the Holy Quran states, they welcomed the men and women of Mecca into their city and their homes. They shared their food and sustenance. They gave and gave, even from what they themselves wanted to partake from. They sacrificed, and as a community they prospered.
• And if you're none of these things, or simply believe the U.S. Constitution should settle the matter, there's the 8th Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, in which category the destruction of families clearly applies. Sara Ramey, Executive Director of the Migrant Center for Human Rights, gives a more detailed constitutional argument against the policy.

So --- hang on to your Hammurabi-like desire to punish immigrants, asylum-seekers and their children if you must. But please don't pretend that fairness, justice or the Constitution have anything to do with your deeply immoral belief.