Catholics Against Immigration Law Enforcement?

[littlebum2002]

Well, I guess that is the problem of the criminal parents to work out, isn’t it?

At what point in your fantasy land does someone who speaks Spanish only get to take responsibility for themselves and their actions?

If I decide I want to flee to Canada for whatever reason, are the people of Canada suddenly obligated to give me social benefits? If I had kids, pay for their schooling when I pay nothing into the school system? Use hospital care of a non-emergency nature when I don’t pay into it?

What about countries like France, England, and Germany who have let in so many people who go on the government teat, that they’re existing on monopoly money- same as the US.

Idiots like Vicente Fox and Felipe Calderon trash talk the US and blame us for MEXICO’s problems. What? It’s not our fault they can’t properly govern their own country.

I’m sorry. Please help me. What part of “I am only supporting people who come here to work to support themselves” do you not understand?

If you want to debate what to do with people who come to this country to work hard to feed their families, we can do so. But please stop bringing up those people that abuse the system, and giving yourself the illusion that someone on here disagrees with you on that position. You are putting up a straw man argument, and that is usually done by people who cannot defend the actual facts at hand. So, for the third time, let us stop talking about those that abuse the system (since we both agree that they don’t deserve to be here) and instead focus solely on those that come here to work and feed their families.

This is incorrect. Catholics do have an obligation to assent to Church doctrine

Correct. if that was Church Doctrine, i would have to support it. But it is not Church Doctrine, it is simply their opinion. Just like the Church has issued an opinion on the death penalty that no Catholic is obligated to agree with, so too no Catholic is required to agree with their opinion on the allocation of resources to citizens of a nation. Before continuing this line of debate you should probably look into the difference between Catholic doctrine and when the Church simply offers their opinion on a matter

You should learn to read more carefully. I have said nothing at all about the people who come here.

You haven’t? That’s odd. I could have sworn you said

“Does anyone believe that this scenario accurately describes 90% of the people who come here illegally?”

If you did not say this, then perhaps you need to contact a moderator because someone hijacked your account. If you did say it, then your statement that “I have said nothing at all about the people who come here” is incorrect.

I’m saying that your description doesn’t apply to most of the people who come here.

And I am saying that is irrelevant. How should we treat those who come to get a job to feed their families? That is the only debate here. How many people that consists of is irrelevant, so why mention it? How we treat any other illegal immigrant is irrelevant, so why bring it up?

I can only deal with one bad argument at a time. It certainly makes a difference to the parents whether they are in prison or not and I suspect the decision is theirs as to whether or not they take their children with them or leave them behind.

If you were a parent who illegal immigrated to work to feed his starving family, and you faced the prospect of being sent back home where your family could possibly starve, would you force your child to come? Or would you let them stay in America where they do not have to face the prospect of starvation?

 

[jonbhorton]

I’m sorry. Please help me. What part of “I am only supporting people who come here to work to support themselves” do you not understand?

If you want to debate what to do with people who come to this country to work hard to feed their families, we can do so. But please stop bringing up those people that abuse the system, and giving yourself the illusion that someone on here disagrees with you on that position. You are putting up a straw man argument, and that is usually done by people who cannot defend the actual facts at hand. So, for the third time, let us stop talking about those that abuse the system (since we both agree that they don’t deserve to be here) and instead focus solely on those that come here to work and feed their families.

The reality of the matter is this:

The Cartels control the US/Mexico border on their side, and pretty much any money flow in “their” area. It IS a giant mob scheme.

The border crosser then pays coyotes, a slang term for guide/smuggler, and the coyote more often than not gives the Cartels a cut to stay alive and in good standing- mobs don’t let criminals operate in their area without permission/tribute. The further issue is that the cost can be offset by ferrying drugs on their backs. Whereas a person might pay 1800 US dollars to merely cross, they might pay half if they carry a pack of drugs across the border.

The other issue is the OTM (Other than Mexicans). It is NOT uncommon to find Arabic/Spanish dictionaries, Arabic texts of a mohammedan nature, etc on crossers or in their path of fleeing. There are Chinese considerations as well.

Where the straw man argument really thrives is in the “poor Mexican seeking to just feed his family”.

trac.syr.edu/immigration/library/P1.pdf

Check out that report on OTM crossing.

I have friends that work the SW border, including down in TX, including a friend who is near Del Rio and has family in Mexico himself. He loves hunting on the border because the Fish and Game WILL NOT go there. They’re outgunned.

The stupidest thing about all this is the US USED to have a guest-worker visa program. The Mexicans would come over, work a season, and go back to Mexico with more than a year’s wages (in Mexico) for a few months work in the US.

This program was called the Bracero Program and it was effectively screwed by the unionization of guest-laborers by people (Mexican communists basically) who, though they claimed to fight for worker’s rights, like all liberal idiots, just exacerbated the situation and made an opportunity for migrant workers to work, get money, and go back to Mexico to come back the next season all but impossible.

While the management of this program had issues, the correct thing would have been to restructure oversight instead of outright abolishing it. As of this writing, I know of no illegal immigrant “union”. Fail.

The unfortunate reality is that Mexico’s issues are Mexico’s fault. Past and current presidents of Mexico like to blame the US for things THEY (Mexico) can fix if they would just do it. In this regard, the Zapatistas are fighting for a particular cause, though the cause is obscured by politics in the name of human rights, via communist politics which historically lead to egregious violations in the same.

To reduce an entire population to a mere subset, while conveniently ignoring the actual truth of the border situation is repugnant and totally myopic, if not outright blind to reality.

You’re entering emotional territory and forgetting facts which need to be weighed and understood.

 

[Ender]

Correct. if that was Church Doctrine, i would have to support it. But it is not Church Doctrine, it is simply their opinion. Just like the Church has issued an opinion on the death penalty that no Catholic is obligated to agree with, so too no Catholic is required to agree with their opinion on the allocation of resources to citizens of a nation. Before continuing this line of debate you should probably look into the difference between Catholic doctrine and when the Church simply offers their opinion on a matter.

I suspect you don’t know enough about what has been said on the issue or who said it to make an informed statement as to whether my comment represents doctrine or opinion.

You haven’t? That’s odd. I could have sworn you said

“Does anyone believe that this scenario accurately describes 90% of the people who come here illegally?”

That just what I said, and there is nothing in that comment to imply that 90% of the people who come here do so for “bad reasons”, only that the scenario given isn’t descriptive of the people who sneak into this country.

If you did not say this, then perhaps you need to contact a moderator because someone hijacked your account. If you did say it, then your statement that “I have said nothing at all about the people who come here” is incorrect.

This is simple enough to settle: cite the relevant comment.

And I am saying that is irrelevant.

Truth should never be considered irrelevant.

If you were a parent who illegal immigrated to work to feed his starving family, and you faced the prospect of being sent back home where your family could possibly starve, would you force your child to come? Or would you let them stay in America where they do not have to face the prospect of starvation?

See, now this is what I was referring to. Your portrayal of “the starving family” as the paradigm of the illegal immigrant bears little resemblance to the type of person who comes here.

Ender

 

[littlebum2002]

Truth should never be considered irrelevant.

Bananas are yellow. That is the truth. Is it relevant to this discussion?

See, now this is what I was referring to. Your portrayal of “the starving family” as the paradigm of the illegal immigrant bears little resemblance to the type of person who comes here.

So you are telling me there are NO people who immigrate here illegally just to get a job and feed their families? Not ONE person?

Assuming you actually believe this (Edited) statement, humor me for a second. Pretend there is only one person who is immigrating here to get a job and feed his family (I can’t believe I am actually typing this, considering there are literally millions of people who do this). How should this person be treated? Should he be treated equal to a violent criminal? Should he be subjected to the possibility of being separated from his child for life?

 

[Holly3278]

It seems that a lot of Americans are just anti-immigrant in general. When it comes to immigrants from Arab nations a lot of people seem to discriminate against the Arabs because they think they are all Muslim or something and somehow being a Muslim is a bad thing. I don’t think being a Muslim is a bad thing. I don’t agree with Islam because I believe it is a false religion but I don’t believe that belonging to a false religion makes one a bad person.

Then when it comes to Mexican immigrants people get racist a lot. This especially seems to be true in the southern states. It is like people don’t want Mexican born people living in the United States simply because the color of their skin is different or their culture is different or they speak a different language. Its ridiculous. I know a few people who are racist and it sickens me when they start spouting their racist bigotry.

So basically what I am trying to say is I think a lot of the reason why people are so much against immigration is due to just plain bigotry. If the person isn’t bigoted against the immigrant’s religion they are bigoted against their skin color, their culture, or even the government of the immigrant’s homeland.

Do people not realize that stereotypes about immigrants don’t do any good? You can’t stereotype a group of people and expect the stereotype to always be correct. In fact, it is often wrong. I don’t understand why people in the United States are so fearful of immigrants. Immigrants have a lot to offer this nation and we should welcome them.

As for illegal immigrants, something needs to be done about that problem as well. Personally I think that anyone who has been here illegally for more than 5 years should be offered a simple and easy path to citizenship. As for the rest of them, it would depend on their situation. If they are married to a citizen or if they have children who are citizens then something should be worked out so they can stay and become a citizen as well.

But yeah, I am a huge proponent of immigration reform. The immigration system is totally messed up here in this nation. A lot of it is downright immoral the way the immigration system works. I think there is a law in Arizona based on illegal immigration or it might be Alabama. I remember hearing about the law and how a Bishop was opposing it. Well, I oppose it too. It seems like it was a very racist law.

 

[Ender]

So you are telling me there are NO people who immigrate here illegally just to get a job and feed their families? Not ONE person?

“Men are taller than women.” That statement is generally true but everyone knows there are many exceptions. “People immigrate here because they can’t otherwise feed their families” is not generally true; it does not describe the majority of people who are here illegally.

Pretend there is only one person who is immigrating here to get a job and feed his family (I can’t believe I am actually typing this, considering there are literally millions of people who do this). How should this person be treated? Should he be treated equal to a violent criminal? Should he be subjected to the possibility of being separated from his child for life?

Anyone who breaks the law should be subject to the penalties the law provides. Nor is it true that those who are deported will be separated forever from their children. That’s another exaggeration thrown out to appeal to emotion rather than reason.

Ender