Border Wall and Catholic Teaching on Environment

Status
Not open for further replies.
blackforest said:
I started this thread to discuss the matter.

Did you read any of the links I posted?
Click to expand...
I had not read them because I was pretty sure there was nothing in them beyond “be stewards of the Earth”, that is, there would be nothing there that gave a clue as to what position to take on (e.g.) a wall. I don’t intend to read Laudato Si, but if there is something in there you think is relevant you can extract it and I’ll read that. I did review the USCCB document and this quote from BXVI is typical:

“The protection of the environment, of resources and of the climate obliges all international leaders to act justly and to show a readiness to work in good faith, respecting the law and promoting solidarity with the weakest regions of the planet.”

Saying what we are to do tells us nothing about how we are to do it; we are given the ends but left alone to determine the means. As I said, there is nothing in any church document that provides direction as to how we are to react regarding the wall.
 
When it comes to the proposed wall, one issue that is never discussed is the forfeiture of private property to the government. Eminent domain, sucks!
 
To be specific, there was a study about the environmental impact, which is important to weigh against the whole stewards-of-the-earth teaching.
JoeShlabotnik said:
When it comes to the proposed wall, one issue that is never discussed is the forfeiture of private property to the government. Eminent domain, sucks!
Click to expand...
What’s more is that walling off the Rio Grande will block a vital water supply to Texas ranches, including drinking water for cattle. This whole project is a mess and, as evidenced by the lack of an impact study, clearly not thought through well.
 
blackforest said:
What’s more is that walling off the Rio Grande will block a vital water supply to Texas ranches, including drinking water for cattle. This whole project is a mess and, as evidenced by the lack of an impact study, clearly not thought through well.
Click to expand...
Very well said.
But then not much of what the Trump administration does, ever seems to be well thought out. It just seems to be reactionary and provocative.
 
Are there even any steps being taken to build this wall? All this worrying might be for nothing.
 
This is just my 2 cents on the “to wall or not to wall” debate.

A political boundary based on geography is only as effective as the owner’s physical control over it. You cannot affect physical control over open space without some physical intervention. To control the flow of human beings across a border area effectively requires the use of some physical land-based construction. It’s just the 3 laws of motion (physics) being played out.

Humans will migrate freely through the paths of least resistance unless they are acted upon by an external physical force which changes their trajectory. The goal of a physical barrier in the migration of humans is to control the physical flow and forcefully act upon those humans to move them to more regulated paths of least resistance - for our purposes, border crossing checkpoints.

It’s that simple and doesn’t need to be some over-thought out social experiment. If a country wants to control who can come into and go out of their country, no amount of “thoughtful dialog” or written policy will do that. Only a physical barrier can absolutely stop a human from crossing an area easily.

We can debate whether care of the environment or the equality of species is the moral high ground, I believe that God created humans to be the dominant and most sacred life on the Earth to preserve.

We should be more concerned about why people in other countries are not being taken care of by their own state leaders and which is forcing upon them so desperate of living conditions that makes them leave their homes, history, and culture, and run to America to find better. Let’s not punish Americans for wanting to keep what makes America a great place to live secure and controlling their own destinies, let’s instead focus on holding the leaders of other countries accountable for the states of living and depravity they are forcing their people to endure.

America is consistently the largest supplier of financial and economic foreign aid in the world - what are the leaders of those countries who are receiving that charitable aid doing with it to actually help their people thrive in their own homelands?

Don’t take me wrong, the migration of peoples for legitimate reasons should be encouraged as all human life is sacred to God and we are to assist our fellow man. My concern is that Americans are portrayed as non-caring and isolationist because we want to control our own borders, and somehow controlling our borders is immoral and criminal.

America is just one country among the nations of men and all nations need to be held responsible equally for how they treat their people and their neighbors. Even the Vatican City State has border walls and controls immigration across its borders. Why? Because without borders there is no nation.

Ok, end of rant…
 
Thank you for your thoughtful response. As you can imagine, I respectfully disagree with most of it.
catholic_knighthood said:
The goal of a physical barrier in the migration of humans is to control the physical flow and forcefully act upon those humans to move them to more regulated paths of least resistance - for our purposes, border crossing checkpoints.
Click to expand...
That is certainly the intent of the wall. But as I noted above, it is ineffective unless there are border patrol agents lining pretty much the entire wall in order to catch the climbers.
catholic_knighthood said:
We can debate whether care of the environment or the equality of species is the moral high ground, I believe that God created humans to be the dominant and most sacred life on the Earth to preserve.
Click to expand...
What we’re discussing in this thread is not what we personally believe as individuals, but what the Church teaches. We were indeed given dominion over creation, but as outlined articulately by Pope Francis in Laudato Si, with that dominion comes a critical responsibility to care for the planet and its many resources. I think there’s a good case that the wall does just the opposite of that.
catholic_knighthood said:
Let’s not punish Americans for wanting to keep what makes America a great place to live secure and controlling their own destinies,
Click to expand...
Welcoming the stranger is not a “punishment” but a Gospel commandment.

But for the sake of this thread, I’m concerned about the environmental aspect. There are a LOT of other threads addressing other facets of the immigration issue.
 
Last edited:
The barriers/walls (not one wall) will only be in high traffic areas and will be slatted, not solid, so all but large wildlife should be able to traverse it I should think. I read something a few months ago about one of the sections that is already in place, maybe in San Diego? Not only has this barrier stopped most of the illegal traffic, but the lack of traffic has allowed the environment in the area to vastly improve. A lot of vegetation is there in the area now and the diversity and number of wildlife have increased by a lot. So, I don’t really think the wall will have a negative environmental effect. If anything these areas are so high traffic at the moment that the environment probably stinks there now as-is and wildlife probably steers clear.
 
Gingersnaps4 said:
The barriers/walls (not one wall) will only be in high traffic areas and will be slatted, not solid, so all but large wildlife should be able to traverse it I should think.
Click to expand...
Did you read the OP? There are 8 possible prototypes for the wall, and only 2 are slatted. I linked photos to them in the OP: Eight Ways to Build a Border Wall - The New York Times

Please tell me which of these walls will allow for the passage of bears, coyotes, jaguars, big horn sheep, deer, javelinas, or bobcats.
Gingersnaps4 said:
Not only has this barrier stopped most of the illegal traffic, but the lack of traffic has allowed the environment in the area to vastly improve. A lot of vegetation is there in the area now and the diversity and number of wildlife have increased by a lot. So, I don’t really think the wall will have a negative environmental effect.
Click to expand...
Links, please? I’d like to see some actual research countering the study that I posted above.

Have you been to an urban border area? The environment is always eroding in urban areas, and those are highly trafficked with or without migrants actually crossing.
 
I have close friends in Arizona that work with border patrol. I actually have a good friend whose husband works for ICE as well so I get to hear a lot.

Those are prototypes but we aren’t in the proto-stage anymore, we are building. NSA knocked solid barriers out of consideration due to it jeopardizing the safety
Of border agents by not being able to see what’s going on on the other side. All barriers that will be built and have started being built are slatted. I will kiss a pig if even one solid wall gets put up, due to the safety risks. Sections have been going up for a long time now , it’s just that it isn’t publicized as front page news so many people miss it. My theory is that some in the media enjoy people imagining a solid concrete wall as far as the eye can see, with a moat around it, so it isn’t big news.

This is a biased headline, but here is our wall, in CA


And in 2018 in NM


Small animals can definitely traverse. Big animals likely aren’t in these areas due to the fact that several thousand people per day are stomping through the area. As the environment bounces back from all of the pedestrian traffic, more animals may try to move in, and bigger ones will have to find another way around.

I’ll try to find the article I read later tonight and I’ll post it if I do. It showed a picture of what the area looked like back before the barrier, and then now. Basically a sharp decrease in pedestrian traffic and all of the litter that comes with it, etc, has allowed the natural environment to come back.
 
Last edited:
Gingersnaps4 said:
I have close friends in Arizona that work with border patrol. I actually have a good friend whose husband works for ICE as well so I get to hear a lot.
Click to expand...
God bless them. Since some dioceses have held special gay “pride” masses, I would hope that the American bishops along the border would hold special Masses for our Border Patrol and ICE agents who are trying to do their jobs every day.
 
Church Teaching, has no baring what so ever on America upholding its’ right to protect its own border and an excuse that a border wall is going to endanger the " environment " is just a new angle for those who side for open borders. How about the Great Wall of China and the environmental damage it caused ?
Who knows maybe Pope Francis will blow another half a million but this time to fix the " Environment " on Mexicos side of the wall after our border wall is one day complete ( which it will never be complete, too many people in both parties are making sure it can never be complete ).
 
I don’t know how much of a negative effect on the environment having a wall would have, if any. I never heard this argument before but it is interesting. I am opposed to the wall on moral grounds, not on environmental ones. All I know, however, is we have a current president who, instead of doing whatever he can to combat climate change so that future generations can survive, has weakened the EPA and backed out of any global coalition. He is not even sure there is a problem, let alone has any interest in solving it. Likewise with regard to the nuclear threat, which still hovers over us and the world. Thus the two most important issues, in my view, regarding the future of the world–global climate change and nuclear war–are not even on his agenda. And, to make matters worse, these issues are not front and center on the liberal Democrats’ agenda either. Rather, the latter are more concerned with political correctness and the me too movement. As a result, while we are rearranging chairs on the Titanic, we are forfeiting the future of our children and grandchildren.
 
Hopefully they have, and we just haven’t heard about it. At the very least it should be a part of the petitions, I should think.
 
Gingersnaps4 said:
Hopefully they have, and we just haven’t heard about it. At the very least it should be a part of the petitions, I should think.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, I think that while gay “pride” masses go uncorrected, any special Mass for our brave Border Patrol agents would be condemned by Church officials in this day and age. Hopefully I am wrong.
 
Gingersnaps4 said:
Small animals can definitely traverse. Big animals likely aren’t in these areas due to the fact that several thousand people per day are stomping through the area.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure you understand what Trump is intending to do. He intends for that wall to line the entire border, not just the urban areas. There will be no “way around,” to use your words. Field mice might pass through slats, but not much else. Can you provide the research showing that the border wall will benefit the environment? Not even the Trump administration will, but if you can, I’d welcome the chance to see it.
 
Sometimes a more balanced and reasonably optimistic attitude is preferable.
 
Last edited:
I have no idea. That’s why I’m asking @Gingersnaps4 , who stated:
Gingersnaps4 said:
Not only has this barrier stopped most of the illegal traffic, but the lack of traffic has allowed the environment in the area to vastly improve. A lot of vegetation is there in the area now and the diversity and number of wildlife have increased by a lot. So, I don’t really think the wall will have a negative environmental effect. If anything these areas are so high traffic at the moment that the environment probably stinks there now as-is and wildlife probably steers clear.
Click to expand...
But the wall will extend for thousands of miles, cutting even through wildlife preserves. And in the urban areas, there’s no shortage of traffic right next to it, which is easily noticeable to anyone who’s been there.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
we have a current president who, instead of doing whatever he can to combat climate change so that future generations can survive, has weakened the EPA and backed out of any global coalition. He is not even sure there is a problem
Click to expand...
I don’t believe climate change is a problem either, and I wonder what it would take to convince you that the alarmists concern is way overblown. Is there anything that would persuade you that global warming is no more of a problem now than global cooling was in the 70’s?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top