L
Lucky7
Guest
Wut?
America's 'soul' at risk over immigration, Archbishop Gomez warns
- Status
E
Ender
Guest
Archbishop Gomez said:
"periodic spasms of “anti-immigrant” fever … Nativists of the 1840’s, who led mobs to torch Irish homes and Catholic churches; the Know-Nothings of the 1850’s who wanted to deny the vote to everyone except white, Protestant, native-born, “pure” Americans; the American Protective Association of the 1880’s and 1890’s who were scared of the arrival of immigrants from Italy, Poland, and Germany; the Ku Klux Klan of the 1920’s…
For those of you who don’t recognize the above, it is from a 2010 article about the legislators who passed the Arizona immigration law from the blog of … Archbishop Dolan.
This is commonly asserted but it is factually untrue and it is disappointing to repeatedly hear this from people who ought to know better.
This is untrue as well and one should wonder about the strength of a position that is based on assertions that are false.
Violent? I seriously doubt this one as well, unless you believe that having the police enforce laws to be a naturally violent act.
This is a little like complaining that being stopped for speeding is arbitrary since not everybody who speeds is stopped. It is nonetheless true, however, that everyone who is stopped was speeding and must pay the penalty for his action. But perhaps we should exempt the poor from all laws from which they are adversely affected.
One of the reasons I doubt the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming is that its supporters have made so many claims that are pure invention or that shade the truth. These immigration arguments are in that same category.
Ender
J
JackyB
Guest
Oh no, off topic! That’s almost as bad as being accused of being uncharitable!
Everything posted in this topic is opinion - not sure why you bother to point that out. Most of the message board is opinion. Yours is all over the place. You can’t suddenly wave the “that;s an opinion” flag unless you want to go back and delete 90% of your posts,.
And it is quite on topic. Read my first post. I welcome anyone to this country, so long as they support people who protect the unborn. I wouldn’t encourage people who endorsed Nazis to vote any more than I do people who support candidates that protect abortion. It is called being Catholic.
What I’d like to see is the Bishops encourage those who come to America to vote with authentic Catholics values that protect the unborn and elderly first and foremost. VOting for the party that promises leniency on immigration policy primarily is not how we are to vote as Catholics.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
“And I think that’s one of the problems we are having in this immigration debate. We have lost sense of the ‘humanity’ of the men and women and children who are living in this country illegally.”
He expressed concern that we are “losing something of our national soul” in how illegal immigration is addressed.
“This great nation finds itself today reduced to addressing this major issue in our public life through: name calling and discrimination; criminal ‘profiling’ based on race; random identity checks; violent raids of workplaces and homes; arbitrary detentions and deportations.”
A quarter of persons deported from the U.S. are from intact families, he said. “In the name of enforcing our laws, now we are breaking up families.”
Last year, 400,000 persons were deported, the archbishop noted. That means that last year, 100,000 families were rent apart in the name of American law.
“These are not statistics, these are souls. Human beings. We’re talking about fathers and husbands who, with no warning, won’t be coming home for dinner tonight – and who may not see their families again for a decade at least. We are talking about a government policy that punishes children for the crimes of their parents.”
We have chaos in the Vineyard of the Lord.
He expressed concern that we are “losing something of our national soul” in how illegal immigration is addressed.
“This great nation finds itself today reduced to addressing this major issue in our public life through: name calling and discrimination; criminal ‘profiling’ based on race; random identity checks; violent raids of workplaces and homes; arbitrary detentions and deportations.”
A quarter of persons deported from the U.S. are from intact families, he said. “In the name of enforcing our laws, now we are breaking up families.”
Last year, 400,000 persons were deported, the archbishop noted. That means that last year, 100,000 families were rent apart in the name of American law.
“These are not statistics, these are souls. Human beings. We’re talking about fathers and husbands who, with no warning, won’t be coming home for dinner tonight – and who may not see their families again for a decade at least. We are talking about a government policy that punishes children for the crimes of their parents.”
We have chaos in the Vineyard of the Lord.
E
Ender
Guest
The numbers at our parish outreach food program are quite different. I estimate that the percentage of Hispanics is 30-40% of the total. It is not appropriate to generalize from one or two examples.
Ender
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
If it’s not appropriate one way, it’s not appropriate another.
There is a problem. If someone ask a mile, give them two. If they ask for your cloak, give them your coat as well. The Gospel message is quite clear, and it’s predominant over a ‘state’s’ rights, or laws, for believers. Feed the hungry, clothe the naked, give shelter to the stranger, care for the sick, and visit the imprisoned. I don’t see exception qualifications in those teachings.
S
scipio337
Guest
Just to be clear: It’s okay to impose Catholic social teaching regarding state care for the poor, health coverage, taxation, (gun control) towards the non-Catholic public, but we are a “theocracy” if we do the same regarding other issues?
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
We are members of a Monarchy, living in a secular democracy. We support those things taught by Christ, and His Church, even if it is at odds with the secular. If we cannot do it for one, two, three, or more issues, we cannot do it for any issue, without it being hypocritical, in my opinion.
B
bellasbane
Guest
This report addresses some key issues in immigration reform that matter to me. Below is a summary of what I feel are important points to consider:
How Today’s Immigration Enforcement Policies Impact Children, Families, and Communities
What happens to children when their parents are deported? How do these deportations, now more numerous than ever, affect families and the communities in which they live?
A total of 16.6 million people currently live in mixed-status families—with at least one unauthorized immigrant—and a third of U.S. citizen children of immigrants live in mixed-status families.
Effects on families:
(The report reviews what we already know about the risks to healthy development that are associated with both so I won’t post it all here. I recommend that those interested read the report - it’s a good review)
Constant Fear of Separation
(The literature on this risk factor may be less well known, so I’m posting what I believe are the key issues to understand)
The author asked a 12-year-old girl, “What scares you?” She replied:
These fears were perhaps best illustrated in May 2010, in the wake of the passage of Arizona’s anti-immigrant law, S.B. 1070. Speaking at an elementary school in Silver Spring, Maryland, a second grader expressed her own concern for her parents, telling First Lady Michelle Obama that,
“My mom … she says that Barack Obama is taking everybody away that doesn’t have papers. … my mom doesn’t have any papers.”
It is the final scenario that parents and children fear the most: Parents will lose custody of their children—not for being bad parents but due solely to their undocumented status.
A large literature on child development shows the detrimental effects that such anxieties and the overall social environment can have on early childhood development, and with it these children’s future successes, including things such as school achievements and earnings as adults. Ensuring the successful development of all citizen children, regardless of their parents’ immigration status, should be paramount.
If both parents are undocumented and none of the children have started school in the US - the entire family is deported to to “home” country, but the children retain US citizenship and may return once they adults. If the “home” country will not agree to take the children then the family remains in the US and some sort of sanction is placed on the “home” country (e.g. a tariff on imports or reduction in aid) for failing to cooperate.
Please comment!
How Today’s Immigration Enforcement Policies Impact Children, Families, and Communities
What happens to children when their parents are deported? How do these deportations, now more numerous than ever, affect families and the communities in which they live?
A total of 16.6 million people currently live in mixed-status families—with at least one unauthorized immigrant—and a third of U.S. citizen children of immigrants live in mixed-status families.
Effects on families:
- Deportations have a large effect on families, forcing children into foster care as their parents are shipped out of the country and leaving single mothers struggling to make ends meet.
- Children and their parents live in constant fear of separation
(The report reviews what we already know about the risks to healthy development that are associated with both so I won’t post it all here. I recommend that those interested read the report - it’s a good review)
Constant Fear of Separation
(The literature on this risk factor may be less well known, so I’m posting what I believe are the key issues to understand)
The author asked a 12-year-old girl, “What scares you?” She replied:
I’m scared, ‘cause maybe one day, they take her [Mom], and maybe we’re at the mall, or we’re walking around. Just leave us all by yourself, like what happened when this girl … just because she went to the store to buy diapers … and her daughter that was 10 or 11, they said that they took her.
These fears were perhaps best illustrated in May 2010, in the wake of the passage of Arizona’s anti-immigrant law, S.B. 1070. Speaking at an elementary school in Silver Spring, Maryland, a second grader expressed her own concern for her parents, telling First Lady Michelle Obama that,
“My mom … she says that Barack Obama is taking everybody away that doesn’t have papers. … my mom doesn’t have any papers.”
It is the final scenario that parents and children fear the most: Parents will lose custody of their children—not for being bad parents but due solely to their undocumented status.
A large literature on child development shows the detrimental effects that such anxieties and the overall social environment can have on early childhood development, and with it these children’s future successes, including things such as school achievements and earnings as adults. Ensuring the successful development of all citizen children, regardless of their parents’ immigration status, should be paramount.
(Also there is a massive literature on the impact of separation anxiety on a whole range of outcomes from juvenile delinquency to inability to maintain stable relationships in adulthood - no surprise there!)
I believe any immigration reform measures must begin with the assumption that parents will not be separated from their children due solely to their undocumented status. After that, the details of the policy can be worked out for various scenarios based on the legal status of the parents, whether or not the children have started school and the willingness of the home country to cooperate. For example:If both parents are undocumented and none of the children have started school in the US - the entire family is deported to to “home” country, but the children retain US citizenship and may return once they adults. If the “home” country will not agree to take the children then the family remains in the US and some sort of sanction is placed on the “home” country (e.g. a tariff on imports or reduction in aid) for failing to cooperate.
Please comment!
S
scipio337
Guest
I agree!
I’m not trying to derail the thread, thank you.
B
bellasbane
Guest
“And it is also important to intensify outreach to non-believers, so that the differences which divide and hurt us may never prevail, but rather the desire to build true links of friendship between all peoples, despite their diversity.” - Pope Francis, Bridge Builder
AMEN! :extrahappy:
F
Frank_Drebin
Guest
It isn’t that hard to see - go look at who voted for who in the last election.
Every other breakdown along racial nand gender lines went a majority for Obama in the last election, save for white males. Not sure it was because of their whiteness or maleness per se, but that is simply a fact. Get it now?
F
Frank_Drebin
Guest
I agree as well, which is why we also fight for prayer in schools, outlawed abortion, eliminationg ay marriage legitimacy in addition to cring for those less fortunate, sheltering them, and providing them medical care.
It just like you said, when we do some of those things, we are accused of being theocratic in our aims.
Either we can do them all, or we can do none.
S
seakelp
Guest
I’m not sure that’s true. Or at least for me: I live in the United States, where we have the rule of law and a written constitution. There are limitations.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
We can still support that which the Church guides us on, in hopes of laws changing, or necessary amendments/interpretations being made.
S
seakelp
Guest
Well, yes. If you include the amendment process, anything is possible.
Plus, let’s not forget that there are effective extra-legal means to live the Gospel. As a practical matter, using the heavy hand of the law can do more to *hurt *our desire to bring Christ’s message to others than to help it.
F
Francoist
Guest
I agree and I do not think that having a reasonable and just immigration policy is a racist goal.
Nor is it ever mentioned that one of the principles of the Mexican Revolution and the 1917 Constitution, which founded the state as it currently exists, was “Mexico for the Mexicans”. Which not only meant anti-Anglo policies but also official oppression and expulsion of Jews and Chinese. The “mestizo” was enshrined by the Revolution as the ideal Mexican race: Mexicanidad or “Mexicanity”.
So the bitter irony is that while pro-Mexican activists condemn anyone with less than a universal amnesty, open border position as “racist”, the fact is that the Mexican immigrants in question are actually refugees from a racist state.
It’s somewhat like “Aryans” fleeing from Nazi Germany into Hungary because the German economy stinks.
Not that I blame the Mexicans who want to come here and work. Their country is a socialist hellhole. Some come to the USA to commit crimes and do evil, but many more come here trying to make an honest living and seek opportunity. The latter sort of person is the sort of person on which this country was founded and thrived! But the rule of law must be observed, and according to Catholic moral teaching you are bound to follow laws that you don’t like, as long as they are just. So even though it might be hard to immigrate legally to this country, it is immoral to do so illegally.
Should it be easier for Mexicans who want to work to come here legally? Probably. But other Americans (including those of Mexican descent) have a right to have their laws respected, and their economy not undermined by lawlessness and chaos.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
That’s why we support the Gospel. Him, we can depend on; secular men are a gamble.
- Status