Catholics Against Immigration Law Enforcement?

[Orthos_Logos]

I am from one of those “racist and uneducated” states that has passed immigration bills allowing the enforcement of Federal immigration laws already long established. I am not fully versed in what my states’ version consists of. To my dismay i find that my Diocese is against the legislation based on the notion that it will hinder the Church’s ability to minister to certain members of its flock; those members being ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS… Now to me an illegal immigrant is different from being a legal immigrant or citizen. The word illegal keeps sticking in my head. It means these people are taking advantage of our way of life and abusing our standards and systems to varying degrees only to leave you and me to pay; sometimes a heavy price. Generically that would make a person a criminal. Yes we should help our fellow man but that is not something that should be forced upon me to do. That should be a choice made by me with guidance from above not a government that is more interested in stabbing its own people in the back and retaining power instead of protecting the law abiding. I know some of these people are genuinely trying to attain a better life for their family but their means do not justify the ends. There are better “legal” avenues they could take and be a better person for it in the eyes of their family and the community and I think also God. Instead of this being a hinderance to the Church could it not be an opportunity to assist those who genuinely deserve a second chance on the right path to citizenship and council our government in dealing with those who have no ambition of ever being a law abiding citizen in a christian way. There are Catholic Churches in the countries that these people are coming from so it just is not flying with me that the Church would not be able to reach these people because these people could be going to those churches legally without either the person or the Church having to worry about any form of retribution. On a tangent, if for some reason a penalty or imprisonment were involved for whoever it may be can the church really not continue to perform its works? I hear people say that we are cold and heartless because we would be orphaning legal children by deporting illegal parents. Doesn’t that also mean that anyone who is for sending a criminal to prison is cold and heartless because we are sending an innocent child’s criminal parent away from them? Just like the common criminal the illegal immigrant should be held responsible for their actions. Not me and not you. Them. They are the ones that have put themselves and their families in the situation they are in and they knew the possible outcomes when they did it. Every one needs to realize that they " Illegal Immigrants " need to take responsibility for their actions and be willing to deal with the legal ramifications even if certain parts of our government decides to turn a blind eye to the law it is supposed to uphold. It feels almost as if the Church is condoning the illegal actions of these people. Am I wrong or have I missed something?

 

[Keith_W_OR_USA]

I am from one of those “racist and uneducated” states that has passed immigration bills allowing the enforcement of Federal immigration laws already long established. I am not fully versed in what my states’ version consists of. To my dismay i find that my Diocese is against the legislation based on the notion that it will hinder the Church’s ability to minister to certain members of its flock; those members being ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS… Now to me an illegal immigrant is different from being a legal immigrant or citizen. The word illegal keeps sticking in my head. It means these people are taking advantage of our way of life and abusing our standards and systems to varying degrees only to leave you and me to pay; sometimes a heavy price. Generically that would make a person a criminal. Yes we should help our fellow man but that is not something that should be forced upon me to do. That should be a choice made by me with guidance from above not a government that is more interested in stabbing its own people in the back and retaining power instead of protecting the law abiding. I know some of these people are genuinely trying to attain a better life for their family but their means do not justify the ends. There are better “legal” avenues they could take and be a better person for it in the eyes of their family and the community and I think also God. Instead of this being a hinderance to the Church could it not be an opportunity to assist those who genuinely deserve a second chance on the right path to citizenship and council our government in dealing with those who have no ambition of ever being a law abiding citizen in a christian way. There are Catholic Churches in the countries that these people are coming from so it just is not flying with me that the Church would not be able to reach these people because these people could be going to those churches legally without either the person or the Church having to worry about any form of retribution. On a tangent, if for some reason a penalty or imprisonment were involved for whoever it may be can the church really not continue to perform its works? I hear people say that we are cold and heartless because we would be orphaning legal children by deporting illegal parents. Doesn’t that also mean that anyone who is for sending a criminal to prison is cold and heartless because we are sending an innocent child’s criminal parent away from them? Just like the common criminal the illegal immigrant should be held responsible for their actions. Not me and not you. Them. They are the ones that have put themselves and their families in the situation they are in and they knew the possible outcomes when they did it. Every one needs to realize that they " Illegal Immigrants " need to take responsibility for their actions and be willing to deal with the legal ramifications even if certain parts of our government decides to turn a blind eye to the law it is supposed to uphold. It feels almost as if the Church is condoning the illegal actions of these people. Am I wrong or have I missed something?

Being in the USA and not being a citizen is a Federal civil infraction. That is less then a state traffic fine in terms of violation of the law. Over 50% of the people here that are considered illegal aliens came in the country legally and overstayed their visas. If we bring them into the fold and register them our illegal alien problem will be solved.
In the New World Order citizenship will no longer matter. Just like you can now move from Alabama to Michigan with no checkpoints and no registration in the near future we will all be able to move from the USA to any country in the world or vice versa with no restrictions.
The standard of living for the poorly educated in the USA and the west will go down just as it is now, but if you send your grandkids to good schools they can rise to the top.
The old order of the USA has gone away and there will be major economic adjustments over this decade. Look at what is happening in Greece today and soon that will happen to all of the western countries while we readjust to the globalization of the economy.

 

[Orthos_Logos]

Instead of terms of violation lets look at penalties. Can You be deported or barred from ever coming back to the united states for getting a traffic ticket? Do you acquire unlawful presence status and time for a traffic ticket? Bring 50% into the fold and our problem is solved??? At least we are willing to compromise and ignore the other 50% of the problem I guess??? And what about all of the other crimes of escalating disorder and violence that are probably more likely to be committed by that crowd. I suppose since we will soon be living in that NWO utopia on earth we should just ignore that. Who cares its just crime across the board that we shouldn’t worry about right.? I wonder if people will still be trying to figure out a way to take advantage of other people in utopia? Nahh there are no borders or boundaries to quibble over!!! it’ll be one giant Coke Commercial!! oh wait i’m a Dr. Pepper fan…rats…just give me Midway Island or something and thats good enough for me. Sorry I tend to get a little carried away after 2 am. But its fun. Thanks for the reply it actually helped to open my eye to some serious subjects other than the one I am posting about!!

 

[tafan]

Count me as a conservative who hates the standard conservative position on immigration.

IIRC the penalty for overstaying a visa or coming into the US is $250. As mentioned above,it is a civil infraction to be here. Based on our laws, they are not very serious criminals. Yet all we hear about is enforce the laws. And comparing illegal immigrants to criminals going to jail, with respect to breaking up families is absurd, cruel, and inhumane.

If we had a widely available temporary worker program for Mexican citizens, enforcing security on our border would be MUCH easier. We have increased border patrol expenditures ten fold in the last 20 years and has it helped? When will people realize our laws are woefully broken.

Most arguments against immigration law change boils down to adherence to Malthusian Economics, a MOST unconservative position.

And finally, it is NOT the church’s responsibility to enforce the government’s laws. The Church should be able to help, through its charities, who ever it wants and should not have to worry about criminal penalities for doing so.

Overall, these state laws just make a byzantine immigration system even more bizarre and complex.

And I have seen families split up over our immigration laws, when they have done NOTHING wrong. No illegal entry, here legally, a bureaucratic screw-up removes one spouses green card, while it takes him years to fix the government’s mistake, his spouse is deported (since she was here on a spousal residency).

Newt was lambasted for saying families who have been here for years should be offereda path to citizenship. I have seen where this could be useful also, a family who owns a house, runs a successful small business, have teen age children, have been here since before the kids were born, are suddenly deported.

Immigration raids of packing plants in Texas and Iowa left kids coming home from school with no parents present.

Yea, lets just enforce the laws and make all of this **** even worse.

 

[manualman]

Enforcing the current immigration law strictly is rightly criticized by the church as an unproductive, unjust and uneven emphasis precisely because the current immigration policy of the USA is manipulative, short sighted, unjust and beneficial to NO ONE.

If you are a penniless Mexican with no special skills and no family connections in the USA, you have approximately a 0.0001% chance of ever immigrating here legally. You’d be better off buying a lottery ticket.

This is stupid. America NEEDS immigrants and there are many potentially great ones lined up and waiting to come here from Mexico. Look it up, Americans don’t replace themselves with our own babies anymore. Without immigration, our economy and culture will collapse. We should be GLAD we have a donor culture handy with a culture of strong family, compatible morality and religious convictions.

Do we need to get tough on illegal immigration? Yes. It’s unacceptable that our borders are so porous and uncontrolled. But FIRST we need to vastly open of the LEGAL immigration opportunities. If we don’t do it in that order, we are essentially unfairly punishing people who steal bread to avoid starvation. If I were a Mexican father in Mexico today with no prospects and my wife and three girls to care for and the opportunity presented itself to give them a better life in the USA, I’d do the SAME thing. So would you.

 

[tafan]

manualman, I agree with everything you wrote. Would like to add one thing to your last sentence. “If I were a Mexican father in Mexico today with no prospects and my wife and three girls to care for and the opportunity presented itself to give them a better life in the USA, I’d do the SAME thing. So would you”. Our economy thrives on entrepenurial people. It is a entrepenurial decision just to come here. Many of them will start their own small businesses very quickly, if given the chance. They are people who want to work hard and get ahead. Are we all crazy in this country.

Another point we need to consider is that it is right and just to give our neighbors precedence in immigration laws. There is no reason Mexicans should be under the same rules and quotas as people from the middle east or the far east. People from those parts of the world can be given priority based on education and professional skills.

Liberal immigration laws are what built this country. There are two ways for the economy to grow: increased labor force and increase productivity. Any conservative who adheres to supply-side economics should understand the benefits of immigrants to this country.

 

[littlebum2002]

Now to me an illegal immigrant is different from being a legal immigrant or citizen. The word illegal keeps sticking in my head. It means these people are taking advantage of our way of life and abusing our standards and systems to varying degrees only to leave you and me to pay; sometimes a heavy price. Generically that would make a person a criminal.

In many cases, this would be correct.

However, these is a very common case which is being unfortunately denied by the Republican party in which this is indeed NOT the case. Everyone knows that a child born in America to an illegal immigrant is a citizen and therefore does not fall under your grouping of “illegal immigrant”. SO I am not referring to those people.

I am referring to children who were born in another country, then illegally brought here by their parents. These children have committed no crime, they have done nothing wrong. Their parents committed a crime, and brought them along, and the children are getting punished. Its the same as if a parent forces their child to go with them to a bank robbery, and we try to put the child in jail as well.

This is America. We do not punish people due to crimes their parents committed. Yes, giving these children in-state tuition and other benefits is encouraging illegal immigration, but the alternative: punishing them for a crime their parents committed, is much, much worse.

Now, let’s ignore those cases and focus on people who travel to this country as adults to obtain work or commit crimes. Two entirely different cases, which should be treated entirely differently. ANYONE who wants to come to America to get a job and gainfully work to feed their family should be able to. As a Catholic, and a human, I do NOT prescribe to the belief of many Republicans who say that being born in America makes you more deserving to feed your family than being born in Mexico. People should NOT break the law to come to America, but if I had to choose between following the law and allowing my family to starve; I, and hopefully everyone in here, would choose to break the law and let God judge my actions. So I cannot in good conscious judge anyone who comes to this country illegally to feed their family.

Everyone remembers the scene in Modern Times where the girl steals a loaf of bread because she is starving. does anyone watch that scene and believe the girl should be arrested? Of course not, almost everyone agrees that, if all else fails, breaking the law to feed yourself or your family is acceptable as long as you personally object to doing it. Look at Katrina: sure, people were looting TVs and beer, but many people were stealing food off shelves to keep from starving. I don’t know of a person alive who would condemn this. The difference is, “stealing bread” is a solid action, whereas “illegally immigrating” is an abstract concept, which God in His infinite wisdom gave us brains which have a hard time understanding. Even though the person who steals bread just steals, where the person who illegally immigrates also works for their food, we are still more inclined to look favorably on the former.

In my opinion, we should make it very easy for people to get a work visa and come to America to work. As in, almost anyone who asks gets one, as long as they are not a criminal. This would ensure that anyone who truly wants to work to feed their families would be able to do so legally. Anyone on a work visa caught committing a violent crime gets twice the normal sentence (the extra time is punishment for violating our trust), then deported and not allowed to get another work visa for, say, 15 years.

Some posters have claimed that violating immigration laws is a very minor offense, and it is unreasonable to take someone away from their parents forever for such a minor offense. It IS the equivalent of putting a child’s parents in prison for life for a traffic ticket. You claim that you cannot be deported for a traffic ticket, but that is EXACTLY what a law passed in Arizona says. A cop can ask your immigration status during a traffic stop. So, under this law, a child could potentially lose their parents for life because they committed two crimes, each of which carries a maximum fee of $200. I agree with your argument that we should be allowed to deport parents of illegal immigrants, IF you amend it by saying “only if they commit a violent crime”.

And your statement:

And what about all of the other crimes of escalating disorder and violence that are probably more likely to be committed by that crowd.

is stereotyping, which is a sin. Just because more violence is committed by illegal immigrants than citizens, you cannot accuse all illegal immigrants of committing violence. Only those who commit violence are guilty of violence. After saying this, you are no better than those who say “Catholic Priests are more likely to molest Children than other faiths”. Is it true? Possibly. Does it mean an innocent Catholic priest is any more of a child molester than an innocent Baptist minister? no.

 

[Ender]

Enforcing the current immigration law strictly is rightly criticized by the church

We can start with this: the Church has not criticized our immigration laws or the manner in which we enforce them. Individual bishops have offered their personal opinions on the matter but their opinions are no more binding on other Catholics than yours or mine are.

If you are a penniless Mexican with no special skills and no family connections in the USA, you have approximately a 0.0001% chance of ever immigrating here legally. You’d be better off buying a lottery ticket.

And what are we to conclude from this? I’m sure the odds of their becoming a citizen of the US are much better than of their becoming citizens of Vatican City, France, or China. They have no right to demand acceptance by any nation.

If I were a Mexican father in Mexico today with no prospects and my wife and three girls to care for and the opportunity presented itself to give them a better life in the USA, I’d do the SAME thing.

Mexico is an upper middle class country with the second highest per capita income of any country south of Texas. If you’re pushing to help the really poor you should be clamoring for the importation of Guatemalans and Haitians, not Mexicans.

Ender

 

[jonbhorton]

Mexico is an upper middle class country with the second highest per capita income of any country south of Texas. If you’re pushing to help the really poor you should be clamoring for the importation of Guatemalans and Haitians, not Mexicans.

Ender

And he should start harping on Mexico since their laws are tougher; which is why the Hondurans, Nicaraguans, Guatemalans, etc keep heading North and pay Mexican coyotes to smuggle them through Mexico, just as they pay more to smuggle them through the US.

The Mexican government goes to all sorts of ends and means to pawn off their poor on the US, as well as the poor of other countries south of Mexico.

I gotta say though, their entry point at San Ysidro crossing is unchecked. I guess they figure most gringos aren’t coming in to find work or stay long.

factreal.wordpress.com/2010/05/08/mexico-vs-united-states-mexican-immigration-laws-are-tougher/

 

[Ender]

Its the same as if a parent forces their child to go with them to a bank robbery, and we try to put the child in jail as well.

No, it is the same as when any parent commits a crime that causes them to be imprisoned: they are separated from their families. The children of illegals are equally susceptible to suffering for the misdeeds of their parents.

ANYONE who wants to come to America to get a job and gainfully work to feed their family should be able to.

I’m sure there are billions of people who would love to come to the US. I’m equally sure it would be irrational to allow it.

As a Catholic, and a human, I do NOT prescribe to the belief of many Republicans who say that being born in America makes you more deserving to feed your family than being born in Mexico.

I don’t think you understand what the Church actually teaches on this point. When any resource is limited there is a hierarchy of who has access to those resources … and citizens of a nation are higher on that list than non-citizens.

Everyone remembers the scene in Modern Times where the girl steals a loaf of bread because she is starving. does anyone watch that scene and believe the girl should be arrested?

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

In my opinion, we should make it very easy for people to get a work visa and come to America to work.

That may be a very good suggestion … but let’s not assume that it is necessarily either more beneficial or more moral than the opposite position. If it’s true - or we believe it to be true - then we should support it but if it is false - or if we believe it to be false - we should oppose it.

Some posters have claimed that violating immigration laws is a very minor offense, and it is unreasonable to take someone away from their parents forever for such a minor offense. It IS the equivalent of putting a child’s parents in prison for life for a traffic ticket.

Except for the fact that they aren’t in prison.

You claim that you cannot be deported for a traffic ticket, but that is EXACTLY what a law passed in Arizona says.

That’s actually a federal law. Arizona has no authority to deport anyone.

Ender

 

[manualman]

Mexico is an upper middle class country with the second highest per capita income of any country south of Texas. If you’re pushing to help the really poor you should be clamoring for the importation of Guatemalans and Haitians, not Mexicans.

You must be in politics to be that disingenuous. Yeah, if I put Warren Buffet in a room with 50 poor people they have a pretty impressive average net worth, eh? Not much consolation to the other 50 guys though, I think. That’s Mexico.

You, me and probably 99% of the people posting on this board are the descendents of dirt poor immigrants who came here looking for something better than where they came from. And they didn’t find it, they MADE it. That plan still works, if you let it.

Take a driving vacation sometime in America’s heartland. We’ve got plenty of room and we don’t even make enough babies to replace ourselves. There’s no reason, not even a selfish one, to be xenophobic.

 

[Ender]

You must be in politics to be that disingenuous.

Unfortunately for your position, I’m merely citing facts. The following is from Wikipedia:

Mexico has the 13th largest nominal GDP and the 11th largest by purchasing power parity. GDP annual average growth for the period of 1995–2002 was 5.1%. Foreign debt decreased to less than 20% of GDP. From 2000 to 2004, the population in poverty has decreased from 24.2% to 17.6% in the general population and from 42% to 27.9% in rural areas. Since the late 1990s, the majority of the population has been part of the growing middle class. The Mexican economy is expected to nearly triple by 2020. According to Goldman Sachs, by 2050 Mexico will have the 5th largest economy in the world.

Yeah, if I put Warren Buffet in a room with 50 poor people they have a pretty impressive average net worth, eh? Not much consolation to the other 50 guys though, I think. That’s Mexico.

That’s a misconception, as the Wikipedia quote shows.

There’s no reason, not even a selfish one, to be xenophobic.

You may think me selfish, xenophobic, and whatever other insulting adjectives you feel applicable but none of that changes the facts. The question is not whether I am good but whether I am right and on that point you’ve offered no rebuttal at all.

Ender

 

[manualman]

Let me get this straight. You’ve read a Wikipedia article and have decided that it decisively proves that we have 10 million illegal immigrants in this country because they have been fleeing the horrors of a middle class existence in Mexico? Do you have any idea the risks these people take to get here?

Your position is shockingly at odds with the facts. You (and Wikipedia) fail to recognize that the poverty line is a sliding scale by nation established based on averages. If you care to assert that poverty is no more prevalent in Mexico than the USA, I suggest you get out of Wikiland and meet some actual Mexican immigrants (better yet go visit the real Mexico outside tourist areas). I have and I know better.

They come here because there is hope here. I’m standing with my bishops on this one. We have a right to secure our borders, but with that comes a responsibility to have a sane and just immigration system. We have neither right now.

 

[jonbhorton]

Let me get this straight. You’ve read a Wikipedia article and have decided that it decisively proves that we have 10 million illegal immigrants in this country because they have been fleeing the horrors of a middle class existence in Mexico? Do you have any idea the risks these people take to get here?

Your position is shockingly at odds with the facts. You (and Wikipedia) fail to recognize that the poverty line is a sliding scale by nation established based on averages. If you care to assert that poverty is no more prevalent in Mexico than the USA, I suggest you get out of Wikiland and meet some actual Mexican immigrants (better yet go visit the real Mexico outside tourist areas). I have and I know better.

They come here because there is hope here. I’m standing with my bishops on this one. We have a right to secure our borders, but with that comes a responsibility to have a sane and just immigration system. We have neither right now.

Dude, they have a government which is run like a window-licker is in charge. It’s ridiculous. I too have been in the “poorer” areas. It’s nothing I didn’t see in the resource-rich Middle East, or, even in areas around where I grew up.

Poorest states in Mexico are all in the southern most portion. If you notice, most of those areas have more indig. people, and less purely Spanish ancestry. The political situation with a Zapatistas doesn’t help the poor in Oaxaca, etc.

Also, there are some issues with the people of Mexico ever actually making it big in mining, etc. The majority of natural resources are state-owned, and the lack of infrastructure, and the geography of certain areas, make it really hard to utilize the resources properly.

geni.org/globalenergy/library/national_energy_grid/mexico/LatinAmericanPowerGuide.shtml

images.nationmaster.com/images/motw/americas/mexico_industry_1978.jpg

Etc.

Blame their government.

We are a nation that is maxed out on its credit cards. We’re about to become Mexico.

Don’t worry, we’ll get our turn in the grinder and we can starve ourselves to death with a smile knowing that we are living in solidarity with a demographic that will never go away.

 

[littlebum2002]

I don’t think you understand what the Church actually teaches on this point. When any resource is limited there is a hierarchy of who has access to those resources … and citizens of a nation are higher on that list than non-citizens

That is the Church’s opinion. I have no obligation to agree with their opinion on this matter.

And my hierarchy has nothing to do with luck: where you are born just makes you lucky to be born in a good area. Allocation of resources and jobs should go to those willing to work the hardest to earn them, not those who were lucky enough to be born near them. If that means I disagree with the Church, then I can accept that.

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

Does it matter? Even if it only describes one person, should that person be stereotyped not the actions of his peers? You are the second person on here to stereotype illegal immigrants. As Catholics, you should be ashamed.

If, as you said, 90% of illegal immigrants come for bad reasons and 10% come for work to feed their families, then those 10% should be treated justly. They came to America and broke the law to feed their starving families. What does it matter if this describes 10% of the illegal immigrants or 90%? Either way, no one is advocating helping illegal immigrants who leech the system or commit violent crimes, so the exact number is irrelevant since they should be treated differently anyway.

That may be a very good suggestion … but let’s not assume that it is necessarily either more beneficial or more moral than the opposite position. If it’s true - or we believe it to be true - then we should support it but if it is false - or if we believe it to be false - we should oppose it

we either give them avenues to come here and work legally, or they come here and work illegally. Considering how we are ONLY talking about those illegal immigrants who are coming to feed their families (regardless of how many there are), are you suggesting that it is MORE moral to force someone to risk their life crossing a desert, and risk imprisonment to let them work to feed their families than simply giving them an avenue to do so legally and safely?

And, moral issues aside, enforcing these laws would cost billions of dollars just to keep people from coming to feed their families. As if our government doesn’t spend enough money!

Except for the fact that they aren’t in prison

Right. If’ I’m a 5 year old child, and my parents are forcibly taken from me, and I’m placed in a foster home with people I don’t know, it REALLY makes a difference whether my parents were deported or put in jail.

Oh, wait, sorry. No it doesn’t. You are taking a child’s parents away from them for the rest of their life for something which the government usually gives a fine less than many speeding tickets. How are you morally justifying that, again?

That’s actually a federal law. Arizona has no authority to deport anyone.

You are missing the point.

A man in South America is struggling to feed his family. He and his wife come to America illegally so he can work to feed both of them. Here they have a boy, who is automatically a citizen. The man is pulled over while speeding, and the police discover he is an illegal immigrant. They give him to the Feds, who deport him and his wife.

This man has committed 2 crimes. He violated immigration policies, which the poster above estimated at about a $250 fine. He was speeding, which is probably another $150 fine. For two crimes whose punishments add up to less than a $500 fine, you have taken this boy’s parents away from him for the rest of his life. You claim that this is somehow different than if the child’s parents were thrown into prison for life, but I’d bet a years salary that if you asked the kid, it would make no difference. Losing your parents is losing your parents, who cares WHERE they are?

 

[jonbhorton]

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.

 

[Ender]

You’ve read a Wikipedia article and have decided that it decisively proves that we have 10 million illegal immigrants in this country because they have been fleeing the horrors of a middle class existence in Mexico?

No, my point is that Mexico is not the poverty ridden, third world nation you make it out to be.

Your position is shockingly at odds with the facts.

We must have a different understanding of what facts are since my “position” is nothing more than citing facts.

If you care to assert that poverty is no more prevalent in Mexico than the USA …

Have you been reading my posts? Nothing I have said could be understood this way. Of course the US is more prosperous than Mexico … that’s why Mexicans want to come here. I merely pointed out that Mexico is more prosperous than every Central and South American country other than Chile. Grinding poverty does exist in many countries in this hemisphere but there is less of it Mexico than in most of the others.

Ender

 

[Ender]

That is the Church’s opinion. I have no obligation to agree with their opinion on this matter.

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

Even if it only describes one person, should that person be stereotyped not the actions of his peers? You are the second person on here to stereotype illegal immigrants. As Catholics, you should be ashamed.

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

If, as you said, 90% of illegal immigrants come for bad reasons and 10% come for work to feed their families, then those 10% should be treated justly.

You really do need to read more slowly; that isn’t at all what I said. Also, I’m pretty sure we should treat all 100% justly.

we either give them avenues to come here and work legally, or they come here and work illegally. Considering how we are ONLY talking about those illegal immigrants who are coming to feed their families (regardless of how many there are), are you suggesting that it is MORE moral to force someone to risk their life crossing a desert, and risk imprisonment to let them work to feed their families than simply giving them an avenue to do so legally and safely?

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

And, moral issues aside, enforcing these laws would cost billions of dollars…

No, it would be neither that expensive nor that difficult. I doubt that it’s costing Arizona much to enforce her new law.

Right. If’ I’m a 5 year old child, and my parents are forcibly taken from me, and I’m placed in a foster home with people I don’t know, it REALLY makes a difference whether my parents were deported or put in jail.

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.

Ender

 

[ryecroft]

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

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.

Ender

O.K. with the first part - I have yet to see a Church docterine that says we have to embrace and give shelter to criminals - if you break U.S. law, you’re a criminal in the U.S. Yes, sanctuary can be claimed, but I rarely see that happening.

for the second part, I have to believe that when a Mexican family crosses the border in the middle of the night, sneaking across to evade law enforcement (or Border Enforcement), they know what they’re doing is against U.S. laws - because of this, I have to believe that they know that if they get caught, they are very likely to get deported. Many just don’t think they will be - and with our current system not many are. It’s a gamble -will they make it across? maybe - will they be caught? maybe - but it’s a gamble they seem willing to take and in turn it’s a chance they must know they’re taking with the children they have now and may have later. I do feel for these people - I’ve even helped feed some of them at Church when we lived in the south west when I was younger, but I have a major problem with people being able to come here and not really have to be responsible for some of their actions. If they drive a car without a license and no insurance and they wreck, who pays the bill? If they come here and use our hospital, who pays the bill? I hate to boil it down to money, but it’s a lot of the argument. If you’re going to come here you need to take responsibility for yourself and your family not expect this country to do it - we have enough problems - look at the current fiscal situation we’ve been put in lately - If the Church wants to help with this one, I wish they’d set up more places at Church’s in Mexico where they could go and get help to apply to come to the US legally. I agree these people need help - I went to Fr. Pablo Straub’s place in Pie de la Cuesta in Mexico near Acapulco and there are many that are so poor I wonder how they survive. But one thing many are not poor in is Faith - they put some of mine to shame. As much as I want to help these people, if they want to come to the states then they need help while in Mexico - instead paying these ‘smugglers’ to get them across the line (and somehave reverted to putting up wire so that when the border patrol goes by checking on ATV’s they litteraly can get decapitated and other lovely ways of keeping the border patrol from bothering them)-
God Bless
Rye

 

[Ender]

I have yet to see a Church docterine that says we have to embrace and give shelter to criminals - if you break U.S. law, you’re a criminal in the U.S. Yes, sanctuary can be claimed, but I rarely see that happening.

Most people fail to distinguish between Church doctrine and the prudential opinions issued by her bishops. We are obligated to assent to the former but not latter.

for the second part, I have to believe that …

If this is what you believe then you are free to act in accordance with that belief regardless of the fact that a number of bishops hold - and have expressed - vastly different opinions. What is important is that you act in what you believe to be the best interests of everyone involved. In the case of immigration it is not the action itself that determines the morality of what we do, it is the intent behind the act.

Ender