Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez compares refugees to baby Jesus

  • Thread starter Thread starter robertmidwest
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rhubarb said:
The fleeing was done to a land that, for all intents and purposes, was foreign.
Click to expand...
The intents and purposes of a refugee today is to cross a primary boarder of governance. What we would today call a country, or state. The phraseing in the definition of the word ‘refugee’ is - “forced to flee his or her country”, not his or her homelands. The definition says “country”…as in primary boarders, not vassal state boarders, or city walls, or “cultural area”.

Joseph would not likely have moved his family to Egypt if it was still under the Ptolemaic Kingdom. “Egypt”was a different “country” ruled by Greeks until 30 B.C.

If Joseph would have been able to flee to a different Kingdom or Empire, he would have fit the modern definition of a refugee. But the Ptolemaic Kingdom in Egypt was conquered by the Roman Empire in 30 B.C. So Joseph did not have to cross a primary boarder, thus he was not a refugee in the modern sense of the word as it is used today to describe people who flee across a country’s boarders.

The Holy Family fits the definition of a “displaced person”. Displaced persons do not cross an international boarder when they are fleeing persecution.
 
Last edited:
Cannot for the life of me imagine why passports would be issued if they are not required.

A refugee is fleeing persecution. The Holy Family was fleeing for their lives to Egypt. They were seeking refuge in Egypt.
 
1Lord1Faith said:
Joseph would not likely have moved his family to Egypt if it was still under the Ptolemaic Kingdom.
Click to expand...
Joseph’s decision to move his family to Egypt was not the product of his own human logic and human knowledge. It was the result of a command he received from God in a dream to go to Egypt. He would not have disobeyed God even if Egypt was not under Roman rule.
 
Yes I suppose that’s right. I would think God, or an angel, would not have told Joseph to move his family to a Kingdom which would have been hostile to a family from Judea.
 
The hostility expressed by the land one is entering is not an essential component of being a refugee. What is most relevant is the hostility from the land one is fleeing from. And that was certainly true of the Holy Family as they fled Herod, who was certainly hostile.
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle said:
What is most relevant is the hostility from the land one is fleeing from .
Click to expand...
You’re ignoring the other part of the definition of refugee which is equally relevant. That being, crossing an international boarder; or in Joseph’s day, the equivalent of a boarder of primary governance…i.e. the Roman Empire.
 
Last edited:
LastStand said:
They attempted to cross the border in violation of our laws.
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that the bulk of the 5000 sitting South of the border have never made any effort to cross. Granted, they want to cross, but showing up and asking to cross is not illegal.
LastStand said:
If they had useful skills, they could take a job from an American citizen and leech off our social services the legal way.
Click to expand...
You seem to have a strong condemnation toward these people. I wonder what it might be like for you to be in one of these “camps” for six months, and have no way to communicate with any American citizen.

I think you may not realize that people who are in this country working who don’t have documentation have little or no access to any social services, so they are not able to “leech”. Many will not even avail themselves of things to which they could have access because they don’t want to risk being discovered as undocumented. Despite living under the radar and in constant fear of being separated from their family members, living in the US is still better for them than where it was in the country of origin.
LastStand said:
We ought to bill them for the cost of the tear gas used in repelling their assault on our border.
Click to expand...
This is not a bad idea, how would you go about that, since they don’t have a residence to send a bill?

I agree that there are some who are entitled, demanding, and oppositional. But I don’t think this describes the majority.
robertmidwest said:
Entering the country improperly.
Click to expand...
Since the majority of those waiting South of the Border never attempted, how are they “illegal”?
 
guanophore said:
Since the majority of those waiting South of the Border never attempted, how are they “illegal”?
Click to expand...
They are in Mexico illegally. They crashed Mexico’s southern border.

www.theguardian.com

Migrant caravan in Guatemala breaks through border fence into Mexico – video

About 3,000 central Americans stream over the international bridge from Guatemala into Mexico after breaking through the border fence in defiance of Donald Trump's efforts to deter the caravan
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Last edited:
And what is wrong with this news???
The problem of refugees may in the following years be much more urgent problem that can not be overlooked.
If Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine takes place, then for example millions of refugees could turn up in Europe.
Of course, this might happen if the Ukrainian army will be unable to repel an opponent, or in case of extended war.
An indulgence towards people in need is a necessary human quality.
I do not mean men of course. The refugee man sounds very low, for man’s dignity, but compassion is necessary for women and children.
 
Last edited:
robertmidwest said:
They are in Mexico illegally. They crashed Mexico’s southern border.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that Mexico is incapable of protecting their border?

It seems that Mexico has given assent to their presence there, pending their applications for asylum in the US. This being the case, how are they presently illegal?

Donald Trump’s efforts to deter them does not have any impact over what Mexico decides to do with them. If fact, it would not surprise me if Mexico did not facilitate their passage just to annoy Trump and his assertions that Mexico would pay for the wall.
 
Athanasiy said:
An indulgence towards people in need is a necessary human quality.
I do not mean men of course. The refugee man sounds very low, for man’s dignity, but compassion is necessary for women and children.
Click to expand...
I think this is the part that gets missed. And I think that men should not be excluded. We seem to have higher expectations for men to be providers and independent, but some are just as helpless as the women and children.
 
guanophore said:
Are you saying that Mexico is incapable of protecting their border?
Click to expand...
???

I am not making any comments on mexico. You asked why these people are called illegals. I answered your question. They entered Mexico illegally.
 
robertmidwest said:
You asked why these people are called illegals.
Click to expand...
I was talking about the caravan waiting South of our border. You are calling them “illegals”, even though they have not broken any US law, and Mexico has allowed them to stay there and await disposition.

I am not including those who are trying to force their way into the US or demand cash payments. These persons are trying to extort the US, and should be held accountable for their actions at the border.
 
I do not know. It seems to me that there are three types of men.
  1. there are those who can not leave their families, and feel their responsibility to be with them.
  2. there are apolitical pacifists who simply want to breathe on full breasts in a world that they cannot change. So, they preffer to live in secure,safe, peacefull parts of the world.
  3. And there is a third type of men, it is those that will happen, what will happen. Because of ignorance, slavish mentality, they are like rodents, who are harboring a ship and are themselves also to blame for the fact that the ship goes to the bottom.
    interesting slang about pro-Putin advovates and defenders Vatnik (slang) Vatnik (slang) - Wikipedia
    But in general, unfortunately the war does not show its beauty but shows the horrer, and for the most part we are all peaceful people. And war is absolutely terrible absolute evil.
    Therefore, it is possible, in addition to male prowess, there are also different pacifist beliefs.
 
Last edited:
robertmidwest said:
They are not in Mexico legally either. Hence they are “illegals”. Make sense?
Click to expand...
Not really. It seems to me that if Mexico did not want them entering, they would have stopped them at the border, as we have. They have also giving them some kind of temporary asylum and are supporting them, instead of deporting them.
 
guanophore said:
Not really. It seems to me that if Mexico did not want them entering, they would have stopped them at the border, as we have. They have also giving them some kind of temporary asylum and are supporting them, instead of deporting them
Click to expand...
Some members of the caravan became so desperate they jumped from the bridge, trying to grab onto one of the makeshift rafts other migrants were using to cross the river into Mexico.
Click to expand...
“Unbelievable sight on Mexican border… tear gas… rocks being thrown … caravan wants to enter … not able to right now,” tweeted Telemundo anchor José Díaz-Balart.
Click to expand...
“Unbelievable sight on Mexican border… tear gas… rocks being thrown … caravan wants to enter … not able to right now,” tweeted Telemundo anchor José Díaz-Balart.
Click to expand...
Mexico used tear gas in an attempt to keep them out. Mexico told them to get visas.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top