Undocumented immigrant children denied charity Christmas gifts
It’s unquestionably valid to debate the pros and cons of immigration reform, and to disagree over whether the 12 million undocumented immigrants living in this country should be given legal status by the U.S. Congress as part of an overhaul. But is immigration really that much of an anger-inducing issue that charities should deny Christmas gifts to children who committed no crime other than to be brought into this country illegally by their parents?
That’s what’s happening in Houston, according to the Houston Chronicle (I spotted the story thanks to one of the best websites on the immigration topic, the ImmigrationProf blog, run by law professors).
The well-reported Chronicle story, by Jeannie Keaver, begins with these three paragraphs:
They don’t claim to know who’s been naughty or nice, but some Houston charities are asking whether children are in the country legally before giving them toys.
In a year when more families than ever have asked for help, several programs providing Christmas gifts for needy children require at least one member of the household to be a U.S. citizen. Others ask for proof of income or rely on churches and schools to suggest recipients.
The Salvation Army and a charity affiliated with the Houston Fire Department are among those that consider immigration status, asking for birth certificates or Social Security cards for the children.
The Salvation Army, as many of us know, is an evangelical Christian organization. It’s well known that evangelical Christians are split on the issue of immigration. Those that do favor a comprehensive immigration overhaul– including an earned path to legal status for those who entered the country illegally– often quote scripture to justify their position. For example there’s this line in Deuteronomy: “Therefore love the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.” Many religions, when offering charity and counseling services, strive to make no distinction between people solely because of immigration status
I’d like to hear from readers on whether they think that denying charity gifts to kids, because of their families’ immigration status, seems like an ethical posture. The charities that have this policy say it’s necessary because there’s so much need in this economically troubled holiday season, it wouldn’t be right for undocumented immigrants to have access to gifts ahead of legal residents and citizens.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Matrix2gather, Tweets Tube. Tweets Tube said: Undocumented immigrant children denied charity Christmas gifts http://bit.ly/7OPFO7 [...]
At least be honest about it. Make sure everyone knows that if they donate toys, poor kids in this country through no fault of their own won’t be able to have Christmas. Jesus, I know people can be bastards, but why make kids a centerpiece of your political agenda.
I had no clue that charities just did not give gifts/food/counseling on the basis of need. I reminds us to be responsible with our charity dollars. The Salvation Army does a lot of good and I will continue to donate but I will make sure holiday gifts for children will go to all children.
It doesn’t seem logical– even if your aim is to create an incentive against illegal immigration, the kids played no part in their parents’ decision to cross the border or overstay a visa. However, if you click on the Yahoo buzz icon, you’ll see that plenty of people disagree with the statement I just made.
Wow. I just checked out the Yahoo site. I think disagree may be putting it mildly. Some of those people are animals. I’d like to think that the anonymity of the internet is what is responsible for that reaction, but I’m pessimistic enough to not only believe that most of those people would deny a kid a toy, they would probably taunt them with it. Then go to church the next day.
First, my comment on Yahoo buzz replied to another comment. My point had to do with the commercialization of Christmas, rather than the celebration of Christ’s birth, I did not comment on illegal immigrants at all. I notice that the buzz, along with AOL comments, are slanted to say the least. After reading them, I can hardly believe there were enough Americans who voted for Obama to make him President. Since he won by a landslide, that tells me something about the readership of those two sites. Regarding illegals, because the issue is so divisive, I feel we will never see improvement until we at least try a solution, on a trial basis, and see if there are improvements economically (that seems to be the big complaint, the costs). When I say try something, I mean anything at this point, guest worker program, bridge programs, temporary visas that last long enough for families to make enough money to survive on back home, etc. As far as the gifts go, if the charities feel so strongly about this, could they not prioritize giving gifts to documented citizens, and then give the rest to those who cannot show documentation? OR, as others have stated, whoever donates should determine if they want their gifts to go to citizens only. In the spirit of Christmas, I would hope most charitable people would not be able to write “To legal citizens only” on the card accompanying the gift. However, it is a free country, and donors, charities can do what they want.