Immigrant Children or Aborted Children. Where is the Love?

Originally written almost six years ago. While circumstances have changed, the principle has not, at least in my opinion.


It’s been all over the news the last few days. You probably know what I’m alluding to, but if you haven’t heard about the young immigrant children held in detention camps in Texas, without access to showers, soap, or toothbrushes and toothpaste, then I’ve linked to some sites to bring you up to date.

See here, here, and here.

Don’t worry. I’m not going political on you. Instead, I want to point out some hypocrisy and double standards between the way people think about this issue and that of abortion. I intend to zero in on two distinctly different camps. I will be fair and even-handed in my criticism.

There are those who express anger and outrage at the way the federal government has treated these immigrant children, bringing up all the arguments as to why the United States should welcome them in, if not with open arms then, at least, a food stamp voucher, a driver’s license, and voter registration, along with any other ‘freebies’ we can give them. After all, they are poor, destitute, and hungry. We should have compassion on them because we have so much to give and, oh, by the way, did you happen to see that picture of the man who drowned while trying to save his little daughter, who also drowned? Just tears my heart to pieces, it does!

These same people, however, will argue long and loudly about the ‘right’ of a woman to abort her unborn child, to literally rip it to shreds and throw it into a wastebasket or use it in some scientific experiment on rodents. They never stop to think about the hypocrisy they espouse—kindness, compassion, and pity for one group of youngsters, but cold-hearted, callous, cruelty towards another which is even more defenseless than the first.

Where is the love?

And, at the polar opposite are those who get all lathered up about ‘abortion on demand’ which destroys untold millions of innocent unborn humans before they get a chance to live, yet express hateful, hard-hearted, attitudes toward the unfortunate, poverty-ridden immigrant children who just happened to show up on our doorstep. Why did they come here anyway and why should we have to pay so that they can have a toothbrush and a hot shower? Don’t we have enough trouble of our own without inviting more from outside? The double-standard here, obviously, is to agitate for a society which forbids the killing of an unborn child, while holding a political position which demands that ‘our’ government turn ‘those others’ away at The Wall, er, I mean, the border.

Where is the love?

Both the immigrant children and the unborn children are equivalent [in one respect] however, they are all human beings who need assistance, sustenance, and security in order to survive and thrive. Both groups need to have love, compassion, and kindness shown to them, along with a safe place to sleep in and adequate nutrition and care. Both groups are completely unable to resist or overcome the ill treatment which they receive at the hands of more powerful people, who are only interested in their own self-interest.

This is a spiritual question, a human question. What are we supposed to do about others who are in a desperate situation, regardless of how they came to be there? It’s not political nor popular and will not receive widespread support, but it is the only answer I have.

“Inasmuch as you have done it unto the least of these, who are my brothers and sisters, you have done it unto me.”—Jesus the Christ (Matthew 25:40)

Where Do the Children Play?

The following is a response I made to a comment (#152) by one, Mulga Mumblebrain, (imagine the inner workings of someone who produced that moniker), who wrote this in response to an earlier comment of my own. See here for the full article at the Unz Review.

“Capitalism is actually a form of cancer, one currently in the end-stage of its neoplastic growth as all the life-supporting biospheres on the planets collapse. The big capitalists, the prime metastases of the disease process, plainly plan to resolve the situation with chemotherapy, ie bio-warfare, to remove all the little metastases and opportunistic infections aka the ‘useless eaters’.”

Where do the children play, indeed?



In order to make sure that I understood capitalism correctly, I typed the search term “capitalism definition” into my Brave browser. The first paragraph is reproduced here.

“Capitalism is an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market. This system is based on the idea that individuals and businesses make decisions about what to produce, how to produce it, and for whom to produce it, driven by the pursuit of profit.”

1. ALL (with the stress on all) capital goods are owned either privately (one individual, meaning exclusive) or corporately (more than one individual, meaning shared).

2 ALL (ditto) decisions made about production are made by either one single individual acting alone or are made in conjunction, association, and cooperation with other individuals.

What this means is that every single bit of production is made by individuals acting either alone or corporately. The base unit of capitalism (and every other means of production) is the individual. There are no corporations nor businesses which do not derive from the actions of individuals. There are no economic systems, governments, charities, non-profits, etc. which are NOT made up of individuals working together.

That being said, if the above definition is true, then it is certain that every single individual on this planet is a capitalist in some form or another. No one ever produces anything without the hope of gaining something from it. Even the naysayers and disbelievers profit in some fashion by the work they do in the expectation that they will benefit from it. Therefore, and I repeat my assertion from Comment #20 above,

“Capitalism, by itself, is not to blame. Just as with money, it is the abuse of capitalism which produces bad results. Notice that money itself is not “a root of all evil”, but rather the love of money which is condemned. Unfortunately, people look at the disastrous consequences of bad policy which is perpetrated under supposedly “capitalistic societies” and conclude that it is the capitalistic tendency which is at fault, causing them to embrace a differing viewpoint and structure–Marxism, for instance, or any other envy-driven philosophy and protocol.”

By itself, working to produce profit and gain from one’s actions is not to blame. Since everyone, without exception, participates in this production, then the fault has to lie elsewhere. The problem stems from the age-old desire to profit at the expense of others who are seen as nothing more than an opportunity to be taken advantage of. Force (often violent) and fraud are brought into play with the result that the most-powerful rise to the top of the heap, instituting rules which everyone else must submit to, so that the rule-makers can profit–again at the expense of others.

Every economic system the world has ever produced suffers from this affliction. Force and fraud are used to take from those less fortunate in order to produce gain for the better-connected and favored class. Every system has those who run things with the understanding that they, personally and individually, will profit from their input. Every system has those, bottom to top, who try to take advantage of the system so that they can benefit. Every single one.

“There are none righteous, no, not one.” –Romans 3:10

In its purest form (individual effort to gain from one’s work), capitalism is a healthy and vibrant means of “producing the goods” which people want. It is only when something is introduced and imposed on it from the outside (force, fraud, etc.) that it becomes a cancer, as you say. So long as people are left alone to live their own lives freely, they will produce, not only for themselves but also for others. This is the essence of Adam Smith’s argument and it has been wildly successful.

Unfortunately, capitalism (like everything else associated with humanity) is “infected” with the “cancerous” thought that taking (stealing) from others is acceptable and can produce widespread social benefits. “Thou shalt not steal!” (a personal admonition) has been perverted to read, “Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.” Or perhaps, because someone has more than you do. Or perhaps, because you have the power to make it stick. Or perhaps, because you are a “bleeding heart” who sees injustice and seeks to force correction on it. Or perhaps, …, ad infinitum.

The problem, then, is a spiritual matter, not an economic one. The problem, then, is the fact that people are, at heart, thieves who will use anything (force, fraud, etc.) to get what they want and, if successful, their gain ALWAYS comes from someone else becoming the victim and paying the price. Advocating for a different economic system does not change this. It only changes the method by which individual people are used, abused, and taken advantage of by other individual people.

You may have diagnosed the disease correctly (cancer), but have misdiagnosed the cause of it. Corrupted human nature, not capitalism, is the reason why we are in the mess we are and that corruption cannot be changed by fiat, law, or government edicts and programs. It can only be changed at the individual level, within the confines of one’s own heart.


I fully expect, Mr. Mumblebrain, that you will shoot the messenger because you do not like the message. That seems to be your nature. So be it.