What Will Jesus Do?

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

Recently
by Becky Akers: The
Super Bowl’s ‘Security’

 

 
 

Like all wars,
the one the Feds wage on our freedom of movement groans with ruined
lives, human agony, and casualties.

Many of those
horrors are on display at the airports, as the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) sexually assaults, irradiates, harasses, and
steals from passengers. And though most of the witnesses to these
atrocities used to claim that the agency only needed more money
and power to transform its inept brutes and sociopaths into efficient
Warriors on Terror, increasing numbers now admit such change is
impossible. Thanks to the TSA's depredations, they understand that
the Warriors threaten us far more than any free-lance bad guys ever
could.

Let's hope
such realization dawns in another theater of the War on Movement,
the one at the borders. There the comrades-in-arms of the TSA's
brutes and sociopaths sexually assault, irradiate,
harass, and steal
from
American citizens — and the occasional "illegal"
immigrant. Somehow, their persecution of the latter justifies their
abuse of the former for far too many taxpayers.

Among the persecuted
is 35-year-old Jesus Navarro. He's one of those bold folks all of
freedom's friends should admire, a guy who refused to obey an unconstitutional
law prohibiting people from stepping over an imaginary line on the
ground.

Alas, surprising
numbers of Constitutionalists who cry "Foul!" at imperialism,
the PATRIOT Act, the NDAA of 2012 and other violations actually
urge the Feds to eviscerate the highest law of the land when it
comes to immigration. Nothing in the Constitution empowers the central
government to patrol the country's borders — and let those who dispute
that cite the article and clause supporting their position. If they
can, they're one up on the Supreme Court of the 1870's and u201880's:
when its clowns invented an "interest" for the Feds in
immigration, they
appealed to every authority but the Constitution
.

Over the next
decades, the Injustices frequently discovered refinements for this
new "interest," further categories of "men, endowed
by their Creator with certain inalienable rights" whose right
to movement was alienable, after all. Just as today's undesirables
are "bad" for the country, they were then, too. Eugenics
had begun poisoning America
, and testimony from its enthusiasts
helped persuade congresscriminals to pass the Immigration Acts of
1921 and 1924. These laws established the arbitrary and utterly
cruel "quotas" that barred lesser peoples from polluting
our sacred soil.

Indeed, no
less a fan of racial purity than Adolph Hitler praised Americans'
sagacity; after a century of open borders, we had finally come to
our senses: "There is today one state in which at least weak
beginnings toward a better conception are noticeable," the
future Führer fulminated in Mein Kampf.

"Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the American
Union, in which an effort is made to consult reason at least partially.
By refusing immigration on principle to elements in poor health,
by simply excluding certain races from naturalization, it professes
in slow beginnings a view which is peculiar to the [nationalistic]
concept."

Such unutterable
evil didn't deter Mr. Navarro. After taking that one small step
for a man and giant leap for mankind, he
continued spitting in Leviathan's eye: for the last 14 years
,
Mr. Navarro's lived in Oakland, CA, without the papers Our Rulers
require. Bravo, Mr. Navarro!

Contrary to
the stereotype of "illegals," our hero worked at Pacific
Steel. (There is no pleasing some people: the very curmudgeons who
decry "illegals'" alleged exploitation of welfare condemn
Mr. Navarro for "stealing" a job
.) So when his kidneys
failed, the company's insurance paid for his dialysis. And now,
when that no longer suffices, it will pay for a transplant. Otherwise,
he'll die.

Mr. Navarro
even boasts a donor: his wife. So we might expect a happy ending
to this story as a dying husband and father receives the life-saving
surgery he needs at no cost whatever to "real" Americans.

Count on the
Feds to smash this fairy-tale. Their unconstitutional, unconscionable
laws against freedom of movement have convinced the hospital not
to treat Mr. Navarro. "Administrators
at UC San Francisco Medical Center
are refusing to transplant
a kidney from Navarro’s wife, saying there is no guarantee he will
receive adequate follow-up care, given his uncertain status."
That's because Mr. Navarro "was caught up in an immigration
audit and lost his foundry job this month." Leviathan could
deport him at any moment; ergo, the Center hides behind the excuse
of "[in]adequate follow-up care."

Right. And
the Center just happens to be affiliated with a public university.
So the State, not the Hippocratic Oath or humanity, calls the shots
here. Imagine how much more merciless American medicine will grow
when the government manages all of it under Obamacare. Disputing
your taxes with the IRS? Fighting a traffic-ticket in court? Critical
of the president, Congress, the TSA, the Post Office, the EPA, etc,
ad nauseam, in online fora? No treatment for you, amigo,
sorry.

Like many native-born
Americans, Mr. Navarro has a family that deeply loves him. "'I
started crying and crying and crying
[when the hospital declined
to operate],' said his wife, who asked that her name be withheld
because she is also in the country illegally." Meanwhile, "her
husband chase[d] their 3-year-old daughter" as "ethicists"
lament the doctors' dilemma.

"'It puts
the doctors in a very awkward and torn position,' [University of
Pennsylvania bioethics professor Arthur Caplan] said. u2018You come
into this trying to do good and find yourself stuck in the middle
of a fight about immigration.'" Yep, this is what passes for
critical and, worse, "moral" reasoning in the Amerikan
Empire.

However pitiable,
Mr. Navarro is merely one of the War on Movement's millions of victims.
These men, women, and children suffer just as needlessly and grotesquely,
even if the local newspaper doesn't report their heartrending cases.
Perhaps that's why the Founders never empowered heartless bureaucrats
and politicians to control anyone's travels into or out of the country.
Yet most Americans cheer the State's tormenting of immigrants —
even when one with his own donor and private insurance will die.

Their animus
baffles. From what I can discern, most of those who hate Mexicans
— and let's be honest: no one's upset about the Canadians sneaking
across the northern border — do so because they assume these penniless
migrants are sucking down welfare. Food stamps, residence in the
slums the government runs, kids indoctrinated for "free"
in "our" schools, are a few of the very questionable benefits
"illegals" supposedly hog.

But this is
an argument against socialism and Leviathan's welfare, not freedom
of movement. I suspect it's also a red herring. And here's why:
suppose we barred "illegals" from chaining themselves
with Leviathan's golden manacles. Does that eliminate the objection,
or should the Feds still police the borders?

Actually, Congress
passed exactly that law in 1996, with its "Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act."

This legislation tightened already existing restrictions on all
immigrants, not just ones lacking a bureaucrat's permission, that
inhibit their sponging off their neighbors. Currently, just about
the only welfare still available to "illegals" is treatment
in hospitals' emergency rooms (courtesy of federal law) and so-called
public education for their kids (though
states increasingly discourage that
). Would that we could similarly
wean natives from their dependence on government! Yet the hostility
against people who come here to work — usually
at jobs so difficult and poorly paid that natives won't take them

— only seems to rise.

We could cite
numerous statistics proving that "illegals" boost the
economy and even
Social Security
, that they
are a net benefit instead of a drain on the country
, or, for
those in Mr. Navarro's painful plight, that more
of them donate organs than receive them
.

But we who
love liberty never echo the eugenicists and justify a man's exercise
of his freedom based on how valuable he is to society; gracious,
were that our criteria, we'd immediately deport all politicians
and bureaucrats! Liberty is the highest end, in and of itself; we
need not earn it, regardless of where we were born, what language
we speak, or what culture we embrace: the simple fact of our humanity
entitles every one of us to it.

Even Jesus
Navarro.

February
10, 2012

Becky
Akers [send her mail] writes
primarily about the American Revolution.

The
Best of Becky Akers

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare
  • LRC Blog

  • LRC Podcasts