While I would be all in favor of adopting English as an official national language, at present there is no such beast in America. The law does not mention language as the criteria for arrest. So the question remains, does everyone agree to abide by the same restriction of carrying identification or face arrest?70% of Az is for this law. The reason why they are being stopped is that they can not speak English!
In my area the places that sell alochol card everyone, no matter how old you may look. They were tired of hearing about profiling so they said everyone will be carded.70% of Az is for this law. The reason why they are being stopped is that they can not speak English! They refuse to learn it!
At my second job I serve alochol for a sports venue. Anyone appears 30 years of age or under I ask to see ID. If you don’t have ID. You will be refused! I heard all excuses from I left the ID in the car to I am a Junior in College. No ID!
Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, “Improper Entry by Alien,” any citizen of any country other than the United States who:Nothing, if it is applied across the board and people are stopped to show their documentation with no regard to skin color. I do not think that is what will happen. I question whether those that support this in Arizona are willing themselves to carry documentation everywhere they go and are willing to go to jail for failure to do so. What is being legislated is that people have identification just for being.
englishfirst.org/ Click on the link!While I would be all in favor of adopting English as an official national language, at present there is no such beast in America. The law does not mention language as the criteria for arrest. So the question remains, does everyone agree to abide by the same restriction of carrying identification or face arrest?
And shall be punished with free medical care, education, food stamps, plus all rights of legal citzens.Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, “Improper Entry by Alien,” any citizen of any country other than the United States who:
Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or
Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or
Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;
has committed a federal crime.
After a while serving Alochol you will learn to judge ages on people. You are doing it to prevent underage drinking and to protect the License. Also, you can be sued in Pa if anything happens to the person.In my area the places that sell alochol card everyone, no matter how old you may look. They were tired of hearing about profiling so they said everyone will be carded.
If they are Illegal they should worry! The stat that I would like to see is the perentage of Ileaglas they catch!Nothing, if it is applied across the board and people are stopped to show their documentation with no regard to skin color. I do not think that is what will happen. I question whether those that support this in Arizona are willing themselves to carry documentation everywhere they go and are willing to go to jail for failure to do so. What is being legislated is that people have identification just for being.
There is another potential reason…perhaps the Cardinal, and perhaps many others in the Hierarchy, do not believe in national borders?I respect Cardinal Mahoney for speaking up about what he thinks is right, but wonder why he believes America shouldn’t control its borders. It’s also troubling that he supports his case against the Arizona legislation, in part, by mischaracterizing it.
But Mahoney also mischaracterizes, as immigrants, people who have sneaked into the United States.
Those “undocumented” immigrants have avoided the formal screening process that my neighbors’ grandparents and great grandparents went through when they immigrated legally to the United States from Mexico.
The open-door policy Mahoney seems to prefer doesn’t weed out criminals or people suffering from serious communicable diseases. … or terrorists. Neither will his overheated rhetoric.
I agree that all companies have the right by ownership to run their business as they please.I agree with this company!
Yes, they do, if you read the Catechsim, and they also have the right to control immigration.There is another potential reason…perhaps the Cardinal, and perhaps many others in the Hierarchy, do not believe in national borders?
The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.
Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.
No. I would recommend anyone read the whole encyclical (Caritas in Veritate) and not snipets the media pushes. It is best not to believe everything seen in the media. In discussions of gloabal authority (which is a reiteration of what was said by Blessed John XXIII, BTW) the principle of subsidiarity is always critical.After all, did not the Pope himself call for a “world financial authority” capable of overseeing the world economy?.
Sorry…I read it myself. In the face of history the idea of “subsidiarity” is a fool’s errand. Even in the U.S., we have seen a continual concentration of power in the central government, overwhelming the states and localities, for generations. We see the same thing happening in the EU (although it is being resisted to some extent). Individual member states are losing any semblance of “sovereignty” and the right of their people to self-determination.Yes, they do, if you read the Catechsim, and they also have the right to control immigration.
No. I would recommend anyone read the whole encyclical (Caritas in Veritate) and not snipets the media pushes. It is best not to believe everything seen in the media. In discussions of gloabal authority (which is a reiteration of what was said by Blessed John XXIII, BTW) the principle of subsidiarity is always critical.
Well, the Pope is in good company, with St. Paul for one, for being called a fool. Christianity often requires us to look foolish to the world.Sorry…I read it myself. In the face of history the idea of “subsidiarity” is a fool’s errand.
You are quite right. It would have been more proper to say I was “paraphrasing.” However, the effect is the same. Chapter 5, Paragraph 67 of the Encyclical reads, in part:Well, the Pope is in good company, with St. Paul for one, for being called a fool. Christianity often requires us to look foolish to the world.
1 Cor 1:25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
I am glad you read the whole document. But if you understand what it says, then why do you misquote (twice now) what the Holy Father said? He never used either phrase, “world economic authority” or “world financial authority”, yet you list these phrase in quotes.
No, Mahoney should have gone INTO politics. He’s a better politician than priest.The Church should stay out of politics.
Frankly I don’t see how this can be accomplished. Eutopian.You are quite right. It would have been more proper to say I was “paraphrasing.” However, the effect is the same. Chapter 5, Paragraph 67 of the Encyclical reads, in part:
“One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy, to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago. Such an authority would need to be regulated by law, to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, to seek to establish the common good, and to make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth. Furthermore, such an authority would need to be universally recognized and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice, and respect for rights. Obviously, it would have to have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international forums. Without this, despite the great progress accomplished in various sectors, international law would risk being conditioned by the balance of power among the strongest nations. The integral development of peoples and international cooperation require the establishment of a greater degree of international ordering, marked by subsidiarity, for the management of globalization.” They also require the construction of a social order that at last conforms to the moral order, to the interconnection between moral and social spheres, and to the link between politics and the economic and civil spheres, as envisaged by the Charter of the United Nations." (Bold mine.)
Thank you for the correction.
When the European immigration began after the War of 1812, the country was in great need of labor. A hundred year later, the need was still there, but greatly diminished by the closing of the Frontier. The Immigration laws of the '20s, which after the Chinese Exclusion Act, was the first formal effort to limit immigration, were enacted after the post-war depression, and helped keep jobs open for demobilized war veterans but also for theThose grandparents and great-grandparents could just come here, though. They’d be rejected if they were carrying communicable diseases or were anarchists, but other than that, they didn’t have to spend years and years waiting in desperate poverty for their “turn”. The concept of an illegal immigrant couldn’t even have existed in the 1800’s, unless they were an anarchist.