One little-known fact that has been missing from debate in Christian circles over amnesty is the impact of amnesty on electoral politics and voting patterns.

It is a fact that past amnesties (there have been at least 7 amnesties since 1986 according to Numbers USA website) have created "new American voters" that tend to overwhelmingly vote Democrat (nearly 3-1).

My point is that we, as a nation, could be moving into a solid one-party Democrat dominance for the next couple of years or so.

This is because any future amnesties (including the current McCain-Kennedy one) will negatively impact the GOP's traditional dominance in Texas, Colorado, just to name some key states. Also, states that have been leaning towards the GOP in recent years may be heading towards the Democrat column if future amnesties go through, as an example, Florida, Minnesota, Arkansas, Colorado, and especially Missouri and Virginia.

Currently, the GOP depends on Texas in the same way that the Democrats depend on winning California.

If the GOP loses Texas, then it is all over for the GOP in terms of trying to remain competitive in national elections.

Pat Buchanan has been trying to point that out for about 10-15 years. The GOP is done if this amnesty bill passes, then we'll all have to obey "la Raza." If the GOP goes, the country is gone as well. The businesses in this country have been conspiring against it since its conception. Looks like they finally succeeded.

"If the GOP goes, the country is gone as well"

This just in, the country is already gone. Totally. And the GOP now supports a Mormon, a pro-choice, and multi divorced candidates. But that is just a symptom of what they always were, of this world.

Every community in the United States has a problem with this now.

Good post. Thanks. I don't usually keep up with the immigration issues as much (it would one more thing to keep up with), even though it is important. And I don't get to see what really goes on in the hot spots... since I live in a relatively unaffected area... so far.

"The country is already gone."

We already agree that our ultimate hope is not in our secondary actions of this temporary, passing, fleeting world. That is not my motivation here. What motivates my action, on a secondary level, is understanding and applying the model of biblical faithfulness for the individual Christian.

Analogously (and with light-hearted humor :-) ), my toothpaste company probably (I don't know for sure) supports some wrong group with funding. Does that mean that I am going to "withdraw from the world" and immediately stop buying toothpaste? The mayor of my city is probably of "the world" too, does that mean I should withdraw from active participation, and stop recommeding constructive, positive changes.

Now that I think about it. My employer is probably of "this world". Maybe I should withdraw and stop trying to be a positive model of faithfulness. My tax dollars in my district are probably going to something that I disagree with. Maybe I should withdraw from public events because I may see something that I do not like, because it may remind me "of this world."

Now that I think about it. I look at my church, and I see some that I may disagree with. Should I withdraw from the church? Now that I really think hard about it. I look ***at myself*** and see far too much sin, and I do not want others to be negatively influenced, so maybe I too should withdraw from the world, since I have some of "the world" in me.

I realize some eschatological views espouse the conviction that, "why should you clean the deck when the Titanic is already sinking into the ocean?"

But this view simply confuses the important distinction between primary and secondary levels. Christ never intended for us to withdraw from the world (be it politics, etc). He only wanted us to not embrace the evil of the world. One can be in the world, but not of it, thanks to Christ alone.

DieHardColtsFan,

An excellent post, well stated. Thank you.

But that is just a symptom of what they always were, of this world.

Indeed.

Come Lord Jesus, Come.

"My point is that we, as a nation, could be moving into a solid one-party Democrat dominance for the next couple of years or so."

I agree but could the Author of that scenario be God Himself? Remember, Habakkuk asked God when He would do something about the Chaldeans coming and destroying Israel. God replied that He was doing something.

Habakkuk says "What are you doing?". God replies that if He were to tell Habakkuk he wouldn't believe Him. Habakkuk says I want to know. God tells Habakkuk that He is Himself raising up the Chaldeans!?

You see, God is sovereign and can use whoever He wills!

From a British perspective...

No problem with other countries...

But a country that doesn't control it's borders and determine "who comes in and who doesn't":

ceases to operate effectively as a country.

This is not racial, religious or anything else. This is a case of governance and management - COMMON SENSE.

Also, if it were "1st generation" immigrants that commit crime. Then obviously one punishment has to be IMMEDIATE AND IRREVERSIBLE DEPORTATION.

My perspective: people don't mind migration. people like to learn new cultures.

But what they don't like is to feel "overwhelmed".

m,

In many parts of our country we're completely overwhelmed by "la raza," which is a term Mexicans use to describe themselves. It's literally translated 'the race.' When I went to the garment district in downtown Los Angeles a couple of weeks ago, there were kiosks selling shirts promoting 'la raza' above the other races. I've noticed they are lukewarm toward us palefaces.

Henry,

I agree with everything you said. I am a Calvinist.

PRCalDude:

I've heard about some Califonian (latin origin) politican calling this:

"La Re-conquista"...

Maybe people should (talk) to the Mexicans and let them know this is rather offensive???

I was rather shocked a serving public servant could get away with something like that without any official accountability...

I'd also say that some of these are issues the world over ... its something that is happening due to social and various other changes everywhere.

I think some of the frustrations (above) seem to be that no one is challenging this correctly.

I don't mean extremes - but that control is the key.