DOCSLIB.ORG

Separation of Nuclear Families Under Us Immigration Law Hearing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Separation of Nuclear Families Under Us Immigration Law Hearing SEPARATION OF NUCLEAR FAMILIES UNDER U.S. IMMIGRATION LAW HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND BORDER SECURITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MARCH 14, 2013 Serial No. 113–9 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 79–881 PDF WASHINGTON : 2013 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:42 Jun 13, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 H:\WORK\IMMIG\031413\79881.000 HJUD1 PsN: 79881 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia, Chairman F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan Wisconsin JERROLD NADLER, New York HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina ROBERT C. ‘‘BOBBY’’ SCOTT, Virginia LAMAR SMITH, Texas MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ZOE LOFGREN, California SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas DARRELL E. ISSA, California STEVE COHEN, Tennessee J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia HENRY C. ‘‘HANK’’ JOHNSON, JR., STEVE KING, Iowa Georgia TRENT FRANKS, Arizona PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas JUDY CHU, California JIM JORDAN, Ohio TED DEUTCH, Florida TED POE, Texas LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah KAREN BASS, California TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania CEDRIC RICHMOND, Louisiana TREY GOWDY, South Carolina SUZAN DelBENE, Washington MARK AMODEI, Nevada JOE GARCIA, Florida RAU´ L LABRADOR, Idaho HAKEEM JEFFRIES, New York BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina DOUG COLLINS, Georgia RON DeSANTIS, Florida KEITH ROTHFUS, Pennsylvania SHELLEY HUSBAND, Chief of Staff & General Counsel PERRY APELBAUM, Minority Staff Director & Chief Counsel SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND BORDER SECURITY TREY GOWDY, South Carolina, Chairman TED POE, Texas, Vice-Chairman LAMAR SMITH, Texas ZOE LOFGREN, California STEVE KING, Iowa SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas JIM JORDAN, Ohio LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois MARK AMODEI, Nevada JOE GARCIA, Florida RAU´ L LABRADOR, Idaho PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina GEORGE FISHMAN, Chief Counsel DAVID SHAHOULIAN, Minority Counsel (II) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:42 Jun 13, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 0486 H:\WORK\IMMIG\031413\79881.000 HJUD1 PsN: 79881 C O N T E N T S MARCH 14, 2013 Page OPENING STATEMENTS The Honorable Trey Gowdy, a Representative in Congress from the State of South Carolina, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration and Bor- der Security .......................................................................................................... 1 The Honorable Zoe Lofgren, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security .................................................................................................... 3 WITNESSES Randall Emery, President, American Families United Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 5 Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 7 Mathi Mugilan Paguth Arivalan, Lawful Permanent Resident Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 21 Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 22 Demetrios G. Papademetriou, Ph.D., President, Migration Policy Institute Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 23 Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 25 Clarissa Martinez-De-Castro, Director, Immigration and Civic Engagement, National Council of La Raza Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 29 Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 31 LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING Material submitted by the Honorable Zoe Lofgren, a Representative in Con- gress from the State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security ................................................................. 47 Prepared Statement of the Honorable Bob Goodlatte, a Representative in Congress from the State of Virginia, and Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary ............................................................................................................... 114 APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD Prepared Statement of the Honorable Trey Gowdy, a Representative in Con- gress from the State of South Carolina, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security ....................................................................... 117 Prepared Statement of the United Auto Workers ................................................. 119 Prepared Statement of MinKwon Center for Community Action ........................ 121 (III) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:42 Jun 13, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 H:\WORK\IMMIG\031413\79881.000 HJUD1 PsN: 79881 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:42 Jun 13, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 H:\WORK\IMMIG\031413\79881.000 HJUD1 PsN: 79881 SEPARATION OF NUCLEAR FAMILIES UNDER U.S. IMMIGRATION LAW THURSDAY, MARCH 14, 2013 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND BORDER SECURITY COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY Washington, DC. The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 1:50 p.m., in room 2237, Rayburn Office Building, the Honorable Trey Gowdy (Chair- man of the Subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Gowdy, Goodlatte, King, Amodei, Lab- rador, Holding, Lofgren, Jackson Lee, Gutierrez, and Garcia. Staff present: (Majority) Andrea Loving, Counsel; Allison Hala- taei, Parliamentarian & General Counsel; Graham Owens, Clerk; and (Minority) Tom Jawetz, Counsel. Mr. GOWDY. The Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Secu- rity will come to order. This is a hearing on the separation of nu- clear families under U.S. immigration law. Unfortunately because of a meeting that the minority Members will be having with the President, we will stand in recess until 3:45. [Recess.] Mr. GOWDY. On behalf of all of us, thank you again for your in- dulgence. We will begin. This is the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security. We will now proceed with the hearing on the separation of nuclear families under U.S. immigration law. And again, on behalf of all of us, thank you for being here. I will now recognize myself for an opening statement. Family is the fundamental unit of society. Family is where we go to multiply joy and mitigate grief and share all of the emotions in between. A brief moment of personal indulgence. My mother-in-law fell on Monday and broke her hip, and even though there are wonderful nurses and doctors at the hospital, it will be family that stays with her around the clock. It will be family that will take my daughter to school. It will be family that will do the grocery shopping for her, and clean the house, and cut the grass. We all claim to support pro-family agendas, and we analyze tax policy, and health care policy, and virtually all of the forms of pol- icy against the backdrop of whether or not it incents or disin- centivizes family. So it is appropriate that we also analyze our im- (1) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:42 Jun 13, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\IMMIG\031413\79881.000 HJUD1 PsN: 79881 2 migration policy, whether it is friendly to this thing we call family, the fundamental unit of our culture and society. We have heard the statistics about U.S. green card backlogs and the time it takes for individuals trying to come to the U.S. legally. In fact, under the current process, if you have applied for a green card on the basis of being a brother or sister of an adult U.S. cit- izen, the wait could be nearly 25 years. Members of the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform now believe there to be a wait for spouses and unmarried minor chil- dren, but they do not necessarily share the same view about other family members. In its 1997 report, the Commission stated the nat- ural interest in the entry of nuclear family members outweighs that of more extended family members. The Commission also addressed the wait time for the spouse and unmarried minor children of lawful permanent residents, stating that no spouse or minor child should have to wait more than 1 year to be reunited with a U.S. petitioner. But the current green card wait time for the spouse and unmarried minor children of an LPR is actually around two and a half years, and there around 220,000 people waiting. So why is there a wait? When Congress created the kind of green card system in the Im- migration Act of 1965, limits were placed on the number of green cards available for certain classes of people each year. For instance, each year’s family-sponsored green card limit for spouses and chil- dren of lawful permanent residents in the U.S. is 114,200, plus any unused green cards from the category allotted for unmarried adult children of U.S. citizens. This preference category known as family-based
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Eros, Storge, Phileo, and Agape
    Eros, Storge, Phileo, and Agape INTRODUCTION II. Storge Love is ambiguous in the English language. A. This is natural affection—family, kin, the There is “Strawberry Shortcake Love.” We love humblest of loves. We love each other simply cats, dogs, and ice cream. This is trite and with- because we are of the family. B. It is negative in Romans 1:31 and 2 Timothy out depth or permanence. There is “Aunt Minnie 3:3, used regarding homosexuals. Love” which is reserved for “special” people C. It is used in withdrawal in 2 Timothy 3:14, 15. who are sweet and lovable. Sometimes it is con- Withdrawal is not excommunication, put- descending. There is “Bowling Team Love” for ting one out of the church. It is what it says, “buddies” in a reciprocal way. Moderns do not withdrawal of fellowship. zero in on “Tough Love.” So there is a Greek word study. However, the III. Phileo Bible is not learned in a seminary; it is learned A. This is tender affection and brotherly love. out on the street with people in local work. (Philadelphia is the city of “brotherly love.”) Footnotes will not preach. Also, the Bible must B. However, sometimes we make too clear a not be reduced to word studies. You can get so distinction between phileo and agape. Be care- ful. There are surprises. Read Titus 2:3, 4; far out on a limb looking at a leaf you forget the Romans 12:9, 10; 1 Corinthians 16:22; He- tree. Word studies can be helpful, but they can brews 13:1; John 16:27; and 1 Peter 1:22.
    [Show full text]
  • Marriage in Christ Seminar Follow up Gatherings
    Marriage in Christ Seminar Follow Up Gatherings 1 Contents Simple Instructions ......................................................................................................................... 3 Ordinary life in Christ: “It’s about the little things.” ...................................................................... 4 Protecting Unity by Negotiating Differences ................................................................................. 5 Thinking the Best: Part One ............................................................................................................ 7 Thinking the Best, Part Two ........................................................................................................... 8 The Story of Mother Gerda ............................................................................................................. 9 2 Simple Instructions Schedule about 1 – 1½ hours Gathering Opening prayer Food and conversation o Simple, e.g., potluck, dessert and coffee, wine and cheese, simple brunch, etc. o Sharing about how things have gone for the past several weeks. Share bright spots Highlights of the last week or two Changes that have occurred over time Break into discussion groups o Read the discussion topic (topics can be found on the alumni page of the website) o Discuss the questions Get back together o When do we want to meet next? o Agree to keep praying, talking and acting in your marriages Final Prayer 3 Ordinary life in Christ: “It’s about the little things.” As God's chosen ones,
    [Show full text]
  • Plutarch on the Role of Eros in a Marriage
    1 2 3 4 Plutarch on the Role of Eros in a Marriage 5 6 Jeffrey Beneker 7 8 Plutarch’s thinking on marital relationships has attracted a significant amount 9 of interest in recent years and has been approached from a variety of 10 perspectives. Some scholars have studied the societal aspect of marriage in 11 Plutarch’s works, raising questions about the role of women in the household, 12 in the community, and especially in their interactions with men, and therefore 13 they have tended to address larger social issues, such as gender, sexuality, and 14 equality.1 Others have taken a philosophical tack and have examined Plutarch’s 15 writing, especially as it concerns the nature and value of marriage, in terms of 16 the broader philosophical traditions to which it is related.2 However, my focus 17 in this paper is much more narrow. I intend to explore one particular 18 component of the marital relationship itself: the erotic connection that exists, 19 or might exist, between a husband and wife. Looking first to the Moralia and 20 the dialogue Amatorius, I will argue that Plutarch describes the eros shared 21 between a married couple as an essential prerequisite for the development of 22 philia and virtue. Then, turning to the Lives, I will demonstrate how the ideas 23 found in the Amatorius are fundamental to Plutarch’s representation of 24 marriage in the biographies of Brutus and Pompey. 25 In the Amatorius, Plutarch, who is himself the principal speaker, touches on 26 a variety of topics related to eros, but the discussion itself is motivated by a 27 single event: the wealthy widow Ismenodora has expressed her desire to marry 28 the ephebe Bacchon, who comes from a family of lower social standing.
    [Show full text]
  • From Romantic Jealousy to Sympathetic Joy: Monogamy, Polyamory, and Beyond Jorge N
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by California Institute of Integral Studies libraries Digital Commons @ CIIS International Journal of Transpersonal Studies Advance Publication Archive 2019 From Romantic Jealousy to Sympathetic Joy: Monogamy, Polyamory, and Beyond Jorge N. Ferrer Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/advance-archive Part of the Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Commons, Philosophy Commons, Religion Commons, and the Transpersonal Psychology Commons From Romantic Jealousy to Sympathetic Joy: Monogamy, Polyamory, and Beyond Jorge N. Ferrer. Cailornia Institute of Integral Studies San Francisco, CA, USA This paper explores how the extension of contemplative qualities to intimate relationships can transform human sexual/emotional responses and relationship choices. The paper reviews contemporary findings from the field of evolutionary psychology on the twin origins of jealousy and monogamy, argues for the possibility to transform jealousy into sympathetic joy (or compersion), addresses the common objections against polyamory (or nonmonogamy), and challenges the culturally prevalent belief that the only spiritually correct sexual options are either celibacy or (lifelong or serial) monogamy. To conclude, it is suggested that the cultivation of sympathetic joy in intimate bonds can pave the way to overcome the problematic dichotomy between monogamy and polyamory, grounding individuals in a radical openness to the dynamic unfolding of life
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Science-Based Bioethics?
    Science-based Bioethics Ch. 1 Introduction Loike & Fischbach Chapter One What is Science-based Bioethics? Introduction Each year, biotechnology bravely ventures into unexplored scientific territory. The year 2016 was no exception: The number of scientific breakthroughs that emerged during this year is overwhelming with gene editing (CRISPR) technologies, gene drives to eliminate harmful mosquitos, and synthetic DNA topping the list. As will be discussed in Chapter Eight, scientists have developed ingenious methods to edit the DNA code of the human genome in cells, embryos, and human beings. Equally astonishing are the reports of two new synthetic DNA bases that have been synthesized. Applying this synthetic biology technology, scientists have expanded the DNA code from 4 to 6 base pairs (Malyshev et al., 2014). Yet, the real dangers of gene editing, synthetic biology, and the creation of a synthetic human genome remain unknown, raising the question whether humankind is dramatically overstepping innate ethical boundaries. In May of 2016, a closed door meeting convened to discuss the issue of constructing an entire human genome in a cell line, a project prospectively titled ‘HGP-Write: Testing Large Synthetic Genomes in Cells’. As the New York Times reports, the meeting was invite-only and “The nearly 150 attendees were told not to contact the news media or to post on Twitter during the meeting.” In the past year, neuroscience research has led to countless innovations as well. Selected examples include: a) stem cell and genetic technologies to enhance the cognition and learning potential of mice, b) brain rejuvenation of older mice to their youthful plasticity with stem cell technologies, c) artificial intelligence in human-like robots (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0_DPi0PmF0 for a dramatic video about human-like robots), and d) genetically modified bacteria that can function as biological circuits.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Eros: Friendship in the Phaedrus
    DRAFT Beyond eros: Friendship in the Phaedrus Plato is often held to be the first great theoriser of love in the Western tradition, and yet his account has been taken to be a resounding failure by many, if not most, modern scholars working on this topic. Criticisms have been articulated forcefully by Vlastos whose seminal paper „The Individual as an Object of love‟ charged Plato with „cold-hearted egoism‟; his account, he argued, disdained persons in favour of abstract, conceptual, objects – the so-called Platonic Forms, and advocates a „spiritualized egocentrism…scarcely aware of kindness, tenderness, compassion, concern for the freedom, respect for the integrity of the beloved, as essential ingredients of the highest type of interpersonal love‟ (Vlastos (1981/2000: 642)). The evidence is roughly as follows. In the Symposium Plato argues that the highest form of eros, roughly, „passionate desire‟ is love for Forms, and beautiful bodies and souls are to be used „as steps‟ towards this end. The Lysis appears to be the only exploration of friendship (philia), and this is an inconclusive work. At best, it is held, the lack of an account of love and friendship for persons compares unfavourably with Aristotle‟s detailed account of philia, which occupies two books of his Ethics and is, arguably, central to his account of human flourishing; at worst, this omission supports the view of Plato as „a cold-hearted egoist‟ who disdained persons in favour of abstract objects. If Plato thought philosophy could answer the question how should one live, in one crucial area of his thought the life worth living is not, apparently, a life worth choosing; as Aristotle made explicit, no one would choose to live without friends.
    [Show full text]
  • Eros, Family and Community:“
    Interdisciplinary Research Center Scholion in the Humanities and Jewish Studies Eros, Family and Community:“ Concluding Conference International Conference, Monday – Wednesday, 19-21 May 2014 Mount Scopus Campus, Rabin Building Monday, 19.5.14 Wednesday, 21.5.14 Rabin Building, Dan Wassong Auditorium Rabin Building, Room 3001 11:30 – 12:00 COFFEE BREAK 10:00 – 12:00 18:00 Greetings: Daniel R. Schwartz, Academic Head, Scholion THE POLITICS OF SEXUALITY Reuven Amitai, Dean of the Faculty of Humanities BETWEEN BODY AND SOUL AND SUBJECTIVITY 12:00 – 14:00 Chair: Tzachi Zamir Chair: Louise Bethlehem 18:15 – 20:10 LOVE AND SOCIAL DEVIANCE WINGED DESIRE: THE EROTICS OF ENSOULMENT “EROS IS A JUNGLe”: SexuAL BILDUNG IN Chair: Esther Cohen Elizabeth D. Harvey THE ONE FACING US BY RONIT MATALON AMOR VS. EROS IN THE GRECO-ROMAN CONTEXT NARRATING LOVESICKNESS: ALFONSO DE Moran Benit Shadi Bartsch-Zimmer SANTA CRuz’S DIGNOTIO ET CURA AFFECTUUM RECREATIONAL SEXUALITY AND CLASS- THE COMEDY OF RAPE MELANCHOLICORUM AND THE STORY OF Yoav Rinon MAKING UNDER NEOLIBERALISM ANTIOCHUS Dana Kaplan Or Hasson “Money Can BUY ME LOve”: MaSCULINE “LOVE YOUR BODY, BUT HATE IT Too!”: FANTASIES AND PROSTITUTION IN THE TRANSFORMING EROS IN THE SONNETS OF GENDERED DISCOURSES OF SELF-LOVE ITALIAN RENAISSANCE VITTORIA COLONNA AND EMOTIONAL CAPITALISM Guido Ruggiero Ramie Targoff 20:15 Rosalind Gill 14:00 – 16:00 RECEPTION LUNCH BREAK 12:00 – 12:30 COFFEE BREAK Tuesday, 20.5.14 16:00 – 18:00 EROS IN MODERN JEWISH TEXTS 12:30 – 13:30 EROS, FAMILY AND COMMUNIty – Rabin Building,
    [Show full text]
  • Eros As the Strange Attractor of Social Action
    Kansas State University Libraries New Prairie Press 2004 Conference Proceedings (Victoria, BC, Adult Education Research Conference Canada) Complicating Public Mothers with Private Others: Eros as the Strange Attractor of Social Action Dorothy Lander Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/aerc Part of the Adult and Continuing Education Administration Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License Recommended Citation Lander, Dorothy (2004). "Complicating Public Mothers with Private Others: Eros as the Strange Attractor of Social Action," Adult Education Research Conference. https://newprairiepress.org/aerc/2004/papers/ 39 This is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Adult Education Research Conference by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Complicating Public Mothers with Private Others: Eros as the Strange Attractor of Social Action Dorothy Lander Abstract: Smith-Rosenberg’s (1984) term, “public mothers,” characterizes independent women reformers (typically not birth mothers), and shapes this study of three educator- activists in Canadian social movements—Lotta Hitschmanova, Letitia Youmans, and Mary Arnold. Using historical/biographical inquiry as my methodology, I elaborate on the close relationships of these public mothers, often with a particular “great friend,” to explicate Eros as a life force in all of its embodied, sensory, and learning “elements, not only sexual desire” (Estola, 2003, p. 2). I conceptualize Eros in the quantum language of the strange attractor, that is, as a learning site around which energy clusters. The enduring distinctions between public and private that “make us believe that love has no place in the classroom” (hooks, 1994, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy®
    J MC P ■ Journal of Mana of Journal JOURNAL OF g ANAGED ed Care & Specialty Pharmac M CARE & SPECIALTY PHARMACY® y ■ October 2020 Supplement ■ Volume 26 ■ Number 10-a ■ October 2020 ■ Supplemen t ■ Vol. 26, No. 10-a Making the Way for Innovation 2020 VIRTUAL • WEEK OF OCT. 19 Poster Abstracts Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy® Previously published as JMCP, the Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy® A Peer-Reviewed Journal of the AMCP ■ www.jmcp.org ■ www.amcp.org AMCP Abstracts Program The AMCP NEXUS 2020 VIRTUAL will be held online the week of October 19, 2020. The AMCP abstracts program provides a forum through which authors can share their insights and outcomes of advanced managed care practice. For NEXUS 2020 VIRTUAL, abstract posters are scheduled to be presented Wednesday, October 21, from 1:00 pm EDT to 2:30 pm EDT. At that time, poster presenters will be available for live chats and will also share additional information about their research at https://plan.core-apps.com/ ■ Publisher amcp2020. Professional abstracts that have been reviewed are published in the Journal of Managed Susan A. Cantrell, RPh, CAE Care & Specialty Pharmacy’s (JMCP) Poster Abstracts supplement. Chief Executive Officer Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Abstract Review Process ■ Editor-in-Chief Sixty-seven reviewers and 4 JMCP editorial reviewers were involved in the abstract review process Laura E. Happe, PharmD, MPH for AMCP NEXUS 2020 VIRTUAL. Each abstract (with author name and affiliation blinded) was 727.488.2700 reviewed and scored using a 1-5 scale with the following 5 criteria (15 rating scores per abstract), [email protected] which are used by JMCP to evaluate manuscripts for publication: ■ Assistant Editors • Relevance • Originality • Quality • Bias • Clarity Donald G.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship Between Poverty and Eros in Plato's Symposium Lorelle D
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects Love's Lack: The Relationship between Poverty and Eros in Plato's Symposium Lorelle D. Lamascus Marquette University Recommended Citation Lamascus, Lorelle D., "Love's Lack: The Relationship between Poverty and Eros in Plato's Symposium" (2010). Dissertations (2009 -). Paper 71. http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/71 LOVE’S LACK: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POVERTY AND EROS IN PLATO’S SYMPOSIUM By Lorelle D. Lamascus A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin December 2010 ABSTRACT LOVE’S LACK: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EROS AND POVERTY IN PLATO’S SYMPOSIUM Lorelle D. Lamascus Marquette University, 2010 This dissertation responds to a long-standing debate among scholars regarding the nature of Platonic Eros and its relation to lack. The more prominent account of Platonic Eros presents the lack of Eros as a deficiency or need experienced by the lover with respect to the object needed, lacked, or desired, so that the nature of Eros is construed as self-interested or acquisitive, subsisting only so long as the lover lacks the beloved object. This dissertation argues that such an interpretation neglects the different senses of lack present in the Symposium and presents an alternative interpretation of Eros based on the Symposium ’s presentation of Eros as the child of Poverty and Resource. Chapter one examines the origin and development of the position that Platonic Eros is acquisitive or egocentric and the influence this has had on subsequent interpretations of Plato’s thought.
    [Show full text]
  • The Language of Love
    Lindberg/Love: A Brief History Through Western Christianity 9780631235989_4_001 Page Proof page 1 24.11.2007 2:24pm Chapter 1 The Language of Love ‘‘The Greeks have a word for it’’ is an old cliche´ but nonetheless apt for our subject. Indeed, in relation to ‘‘love,’’ the Greeks not only had a word, they had many words! Like so many aspects of Western culture, our understandings and views of love have been influenced by contributions from Greek thought. The Greek vocabulary for ‘‘love’’ includes the nouns ‘‘storge,’’ ‘‘epithymia,’’ ‘‘philia,’’ ‘‘eros,’’ and ‘‘agape,’’ and their respective verb forms. On occasion some of these words for love are interchangeable but they are not strong synonyms. As we shall see, the history of the language of love is intimately related to the history of ideas. But as some wag once put it, the history of ideas is akin to nailing jello to the wall. Hence, caveat emptor, readers are warned that past historical contexts are often foreign countries and that words familiar to us may have been used quite differently in different times and places. For example, Cheyette notes in his study of medieval troubadour literature that when we moderns limit our concept of love to a sentiment, we miss its medieval political and social meanings. Bolkestein makes a similar Lindberg/Love: A Brief History Through Western Christianity 9780631235989_4_001 Page Proof page 2 24.11.2007 2:24pm 2 The Language of Love point in his study of pre-Christian social welfare when he notes that in classical culture ‘‘philanthropy’’ meant love among men or human love not charity or social welfare.
    [Show full text]
  • Marriage - the Peculiar Institution: an Exploration of Marriage and the Women's Rights Movement in the 19Th Century
    NOTE MARRIAGE - THE PECULIAR INSTITUTION: AN EXPLORATION OF MARRIAGE AND THE WOMEN'S RIGHTS MOVEMENT IN THE 19TH CENTURY Alexandra Murray' I. INTRODUCTION In 1852, Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote a letter to Susan B. Anthony stating, "I feel this whole question of woman's rights turns on the pivot of the marriage relation. '' 2 Indeed, marriage was a central topic of discussion for women's rights activists in the nineteenth century. Stanton criticized marriage as the legal endorsement of inequality and called for women to rebel against marriage. Marriage, she argued, was as oppressive as slavery, de- nying married women the right to hold property, the right to keep wages and the right to custody of their children. Yet, while the Abolitionist movement called for an end to slavery, the wo- men's rights movement as a whole never called for the complete abolition of marriage. In contrast, Dianne Post argues: The attempt to kill the poisonous tree of slavery by lopping off a few of its unsightly branches. works no better than trying to fix the institution of marriage by gradual reform... No one 1. UCLA School Of Law, JD May 2006. Associate, O'Melveny & Myers. Special thanks to Professor Clyde Spillenger for all his help with this piece. 2. Letter from Elizabeth Cady Stanton to Susan B. Anthony (Mar. 1, 1852), in 1 THE SELECTED PAPERS OF ELIZABETH CADY STANTON AND SUSAN B. ANTHONY, 1840-1866, at 195 (Ann D. Gordon ed., 1997) [hereinafter 1 SELECTED PAPERS]. UCLA WOMEN'S LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 16:137 would suggest that we should have just reformed slavery, as 3 we have done with marriage, instead of abolishing it.
    [Show full text]