Do you support the Minutemen? Well don't

[aspawloski4th]

Wow! that could be titled “The Litany of a Xenophobe”
It’s just WRONG to be going around with these kinds of attitudes in your heart.

I’ll certainly pray for you to have more peace and charity.

FYI: I’m only comparing it to what it IS “a civil offense” to try and give you some perspective. You’ve gotten yourself all worked up and are calling human beings “illegals” and referring to these humans, these families of immigrants as “criminals” solely on their “presence” here. Their “presence” (if in fact it’s unlawful) is a civil offense. If you don’t believe me google it, do some research. You need to get a grip on reality and understand the difference between criminal laws and civil laws.

How do you know your neighbors are here unlawfully? Have you asked to see their birth certificates? Or drivers licenses? or passport? or are you just judging them by the color of their skin and the language they speak?

That’s one of the issues I have with the whole idea of the Minutemen is they don’t have the authority anymore than you or I to determine who is here legally and who is not. I could go up to the first Mexican-looking person I see and ask to see their identification, but that would be just wrong and a violation of their rights. Can’t you see how wrong that is? How would you like it if anyone and everyone came up to you asking to see your identification? suspecting you of being a criminal? a thief?

The thing is, these Minutemen are the ones who are unpatriotic. Our Country has a set of rules and officials to enforce those rules and they decide which rules they want to enforce and which ones they don’t and how they want to enforce them…yadayadayada. That’s not good enough for the Minutemen. They think the Country should be doing things THEIR way, the way THEY’D like it to be and so they take matters into their own hands. Just like President Bush said, they’re vigilantes. They’re trying to enforce their own laws.

We have a democracy in this country. It’s run by a democracy, so that when a handful of old geezers decide they don’t like the way the government is handling things, instead of forming their own “minutemen-geezer patrol” they’re to talk to their legislators, talk to the public and get the majority of voters to change the law rather than take the law into their own hands. That’s the “democratic” way. That’s patriotism is. A patriot is " one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests" rather than one who takes the law into their own hands.

first the minute men do have a right to do what they are doing. they officially are a part of the unorganized militia which by federal definition is every able bodied male ages 17 to 45. scond this is not a democracy its a constitutional republic, the rule of law not the rule of men. a concepot that goes back to the time of moses.3rd I speak english just fine there is a lot less reason to suspect me of being illegal than someone who know not a lick of english( my dutch ,german and polish ancestors all learned english imediately upon coming here so no one gets my sympathy on language. the highest law of the land is the constitution, when my country’s resourses are being ravaged by people not here legally I know my government is not doing it’s constitutional duty of protecting the borders and the comon welfare. I quite frankly dont care how that gets done ,only that it does. if you dont mind living in a 3rd world nation go emigrate to one, Im not about to quietly sit by and see my nation’s resourses get so depleted because of uncontrolled immigration that my nation gets no better than any other third world nation. I dont work and pay taxes so that my government give the money away to people who dont belong here in the first place. I dont need risk of disease elevated for me and my not so healthy wife because we dont control who comes here. quite frankly I dont care about individual statutes , I want the constitution followed.

 

[jabelltulsa]

today it’s let’s get the mexicans… catch my drift?

It’s not the Mexicans that we are “getting”. Their is a process of naturalization in place for a reason. I welcome all people of all cultures to my country (and I vote that way too), granted that they follow the protections (in the form of laws) we have in place. This is for the good of all. This country has plenty of opportunity. The reason why is that the people of this country have a structure in place that protects them (though that system is falling apart).

It doesn’t seem too charitable to those who sacrifice, and go through the naturalization process, in order to attain proper citizenship, to then have their fellow country men and women not do so as well. If you think this is too strict, please, by all means, help them attain citizenship.

I don’t agree with the minutemen in the subject of this post, however. That is terrible.

 

[sprout]

I have to disagree with some of your post, here. I’m not trying to be picky here, but I have to interject this. We do not live in a democracy. We live in a republic. A democracy would be extremely chaotic. In a democracy, we would vote on every issue, and every issue that would come up would have to be voted on; the majority would rule. This is not always the best practice. We have elected representatives to do this for us. Our job is to keep them in line with a vote for their election or that of another candidate. A democracy would do away with this form of representation.

In our system, our founding fathers setup the small, but well worded constitution, and then made it very difficult to change. The document limits the power of the federal government (read BOR 1-10 - "The government shall not … ") The responsibility of government does, in fact, rely primarily on the private citizen. We should govern ourselves first - Freedom with responsibility. After that, it should go local, state, then federal.

I digress … back to the subject at hand …

We are allowed to protest, and practice free speech in all forms, and we should feel it our civic duty to do so in political matters.

What we do not have the right to do, is to threaten, spit upon, beat up, or oppress other people.

In watching those videos about the minutemen (faction?), I would want my law enforcement officers to arrest, or at very least, issue citations to those who did these things to other people - citizens or not.

If these people are illegal, then we have to do our best to get them back to the country of their origin, where they can apply for naturalization. This is not that simple; don’t worry, I understand that.

A closed boarder would fix most of this situation for the US. The Mexicans will have to sort out their government on their own. I believe they can do it.

I stand corrected. Thank you and it’s not being nit picky on your part.

As a ProLife protester I can relate to the “right to protest” unjust laws. Protesting our government’s handling of situations is one thing, taking matters into your own hands as the Minutemen have done and terrorizing people is another.

The point is that none of these “minutemen” have the authority to go up to someone they “suspect” of unlawful presence and demand proof of citizenship the way that government officials can. That leaves them at the mercy of their prejudices. They are limited in their “right to protest” in that they cannot violate the rights of others. In so doing, I think they show as much disrespect for the law as vigilantes who take the law into their own hands.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

This is almost as cultish as Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

I stand corrected. Thank you and it’s not being nit picky on your part.

As a ProLife protester I can relate to the “right to protest” unjust laws. Protesting our government’s handling of situations is one thing, taking matters into your own hands as the Minutemen have done and terrorizing people is another.

The point is that none of these “minutemen” have the authority to go up to someone they “suspect” of unlawful presence and demand proof of citizenship the way that government officials can. That leaves them at the mercy of their prejudices. They are limited in their “right to protest” in that they cannot violate the rights of others. In so doing, I think they show as much disrespect for the law as vigilantes who take the law into their own hands.

Even the illegals have the full protection of the Constitution. Everyone on American soil does whether we like it or not.

 

[Walt_Oliver]

MODERATOR WARNING

Even with all the Church documents on the subject, there is still room for differences of opinion of the subject of immigration, especially the illegal variety. This is a reminder of a few forum rules for those who fail to demonstrate civility and charity toward their fellow posters.

Do not state or imply that those with whom you disagree are not following Church teaching. Church documents deal with the rights and responsibilities of both individuals and states, which are not mutually exclusive, but must be considered in total.

Do not question the faith of another poster or profess to know what is in his heart.

Discuss the topic of the thread, not each other.

Personal attacks are not allowed, whether overtly stated or implied.

Some of you really need to review the forum rules and take them to heart before infractions and/or suspensions are handed out. I’m asking nicely. What happens next is up to you.

Thank you for your cooperation.

 

[aspawloski4th]

Even the illegals have the full protection of the Constitution. Everyone on American soil does whether we like it or not.

That is incorrect sir, or my american governemnt teacher 25 years ago was correct. people on our soil who are not citizens are subject to some rights like their life, not to be stolen from, other basic rights, mainly in general terms some of the bill of rights. rights that citizens have that non americans on our soil dont have are gun ownership, trial by jury,to vote,etc.

 

[yannick]

if they came here undocumented they came here illegally , thus an illegal alien. please dont make comparrisons to the far distant past. the american indian didnt have sovereign borders or a unified governement, or written law. no unified language either. they were not a unified nation in any sense of the word what so ever. so any of our white ancestors were invading indian territory than indians were invading eachother’s territory. its a differnt society now. illegals are driving wages down, drain hospital resourses, and yes not putting anything in the collection plate at the Catholic churches they attend, while demanding special spanish Masses for themselves. enough is enough , draining our nation is going to make this a 3rd world nation for everyone.

Aspawloski, How very convient, your argument is basically: “When I took the candy from the other dude there was no law, so I took it, now to make sure that nobody comes and take the candy from me. I put together a law that made it illegal to do so” Let’s get real for a second!!! I like the fact that you used the word “invading” to describe what our ancestors did (and thank God they did!) cause that excatly what they did. Now to me invading wether there is a written law or not simply breaks the moral law. But as I said on a prior post we should not stop at morals on the catholic forum. Let’s look at charity:
The argument really goes like this most of the time: They are invading our country, they are driving our wages down, draining our hospital ressources, not putting anything in our church’s collection plate… Ours, our, us, Mine, my, me… I am sure you’re starting to see the pictures…How about that for charity?
As for not contributing to collection plates at church where I go they actually contribute more than the english and french masses put together… the world is a bit bigger than your (there it is again) backyard.
I am just amazed at how people on this forum that make so much sense when it come to other catholic subjects ie. pope, mass and liturgy all that good stuff are completly uncatholic when it comes to this particular issue. To me it shows an uncapacity to live our faith to its sacrificial character. As long as we are talking liturgy, primacy of rome we are PROUD to be catholics and we say let’s follow what the church say. Immigration? well the church is wrong… the church in america is not the Church… they’re illegal they have no right except not to be killed (that a good one!)… Let get real our Liturgy, good devotions and all the rest is void if we are unable and unwilling to act on it and I’m not talking militantism for liturgical reform etc… I am talking about seeing Jesus in our neighbor (Have we been to church last sunday? the Good Samaritan gospel rings a bell?). The bible is clear if you profess loving God that you cannot see and hate the brother that you see you’re a liar. “NO NO Yannick I love him I just dont want to love him in MY country…” Really? but he came here illgaly at 2 years old he is now 23 speaks english and all what you gonna do? Send him Home I don’t care he is illegal. But that other couple came and overstay their visa they have 2 kids born here they’re about 11 year old? I really dont give a care send them home put the kid in foster care… How charitable, how catholic.
Let’s try and be educated on the issue and not put everybody in the same bag. One of your friend here on the forum is so short sided as to basically say that they are all part of MS13 in NOVA how educated is that? I live in the DC VA MD area so I know how wrong he is. The problem is people think, debate, express the issues of our divine faith far more than they actually practice it in devotion and more than that in action.
We are CATHOLIC PEOPLE!!!

 

[aspawloski4th]

my ancestors ( irish, english,austrain, dutch, german, and polish) all came here by legal means, when they immigrated here they broke not one law of the USA in doing. my wife’s ancestors lithuanian, french, english, spanish, scottish, and german all came here legally too.
they assimilated, they learned english immediately, and were contributers to thier communities they settled in. my irish, dutch and polish ancestors made big contributions to founding several parrishes in the grand rapids diocese, along with my wife’s lithuanian ancestors. they assililated, contributed and made their way, they were a help to the grand rapids metro area. these illegals are a drain. because they dont contribute. parishes that take on in mass suddenly aquire debt because they dont put in the collection plate, they drain the medical system by flooding emergency rooms with colds and flus, wages of some professions have gone down because of illegals. truely if an illegal was in a situation like the gospel reading you mention Id do what my resourses are capable of to get his health back, but then Id have him taken back to his country of orgin, because im compassionate to my fellow citezens too. please dont put my compassion into question if you dont want yours put into question.

 

[yannick]

my ancestors ( irish, english,austrain, dutch, german, and polish) all came here by legal means, when they immigrated here they broke not one law of the USA in doing. my wife’s ancestors lithuanian, french, english, spanish, scottish, and german all came here legally too.
they assimilated, they learned english immediately, and were contributers to thier communities they settled in. my irish, dutch and polish ancestors made big contributions to founding several parrishes in the grand rapids diocese, along with my wife’s lithuanian ancestors. they assililated, contributed and made their way, they were a help to the grand rapids metro area. these illegals are a drain. because they dont contribute. parishes that take on in mass suddenly aquire debt because they dont put in the collection plate, they drain the medical system by flooding emergency rooms with colds and flus, wages of some professions have gone down because of illegals. truely if an illegal was in a situation like the gospel reading you mention Id do what my resourses are capable of to get his health back, but then Id have him taken back to his country of orgin, because im compassionate to my fellow citezens too. please dont put my compassion into question if you dont want yours put into question.

The problem again is that we look like we are looking at big problem introspectively (if I may say) again MY, MY, MY is coming (my ancestors, my wife). I used “our” to describe those ancestors we are clearly not family bro. You’re taking a comment that I making about our common ancestors (not necessarly blood ancestors) and making it a personal one. My ancestor did not come on the mayflower or whatever, they came in way latter. My point is that we have to put things in perspective, and not treat those new comers worst then the bottom of our shoes. We are changing the character of america. Today the legal immigrant is look upon with suspicion because he has an accent it should not be the case. The problem is there, its clear hate and emotion will not solve it (not that you hate them). First let’s pray than let’s look at thing in a comprehensive way, and again if at all possible let’s try and break them into categories; those 2 examples I have given should not happened in the name of Charity. respect, consideration, dignity and yes a great dose of charity 'all i’m saying…

 

[ChristianVet]

I support the Minutemen and their right to defend this country against an illegal invasion.

I do not support their anti-Catholic or bigoted statements and harassment, though, if true.

I would hope they would stand firm in their convictions, but do it with civility.

The Church, or any of its clergy and representatives, should not be encouraging people to break the law. That is scandalous in my opinion.

 

[Moneo]

What do Canadians call citizens of the United States?

How do you distinguish these people from Canadians?

If Mexicans are Americans, why are there Mexican-Americans?

Anti-Americanism is offensive and deserves reprobation. It does not come from the Church and is against the teachings of the Church because it is offensive and insulting. It is the sort of insult that leads eventually to war. Someone levies an online insult against one foreign country, and some kid sees it and develops a grudge. Later, he goes on to talk politics and to vote and organize and serve in the military, and that grudge can develop into something dangerous. This isn’t just child’s play. As Catholics and peacemakers, we need to respect the legitimate aspirations of countries.

It is astonishing to me to see Catholics who ostensibly want to defend the Catholic position on immigration to the United States try to do so by advocating internationalism and anti-Americanism. Not only is it counter-productive, but it is truly immoral. In fact, one of the reasons it is immoral is because it is counter-productive.

Temper, temper …

You’ll have to consult with a Canadian for the current term most commonly used to distinguish themselves from citizens of the United States.

You distinguish them, however, by saying that one is from Canada and the other from the United States. It’s rather simple, actually. When people ask me where I’m from I say “I’m from the United States.” While saying I’m American would also be true, it doesn’t provide the answer that the person is looking for, i.e., the country of my birth. Naturally, if I respond that way the person will most likely assume it’s the United States (because of my skin tone and facial features), but they haven’t always. I *have *been asked if I’m from the U.S. or Canada. And, of course, if a Chilean or an Argentinian refers to himself as an American, I don’t start acting as if they’re stepping on my turf. They are Americans.

“Mexican-American”, like “Irish-American”, “German-American”, “African-American” etc. ad nauseum is PC nonsense which started up in the late 1980s in order to highlight ethnic and ancestral cultural identity. I find it pointless, at times redundant and most often a little silly, but I’m not going to get bent out of shape over it. People can self-define however they wish …

As to your other points, I sincerely hope that you just did a bad editing job on your reply and that they aren’t aimed at me. Because I fail to see how pointing out that the other occupants of the CONTINENTS referred to as AMERICA, THE AMERICAS or NORTH AMERICA, SOUTH AMERICA and CENTRAL AMERICA is somehow “anti-American”. I suppose that that statement was meant I do not love and honour the country of my birth, which you neither know to be true nor have any reason to conclude from reading my earlier post; if that was your intent, you’re out of line.

So, however “astonishing” it may seem to you, I’m afraid that if you want to suggest that someone’s trying to defend illegal immigration to the U.S., or the Catholic position on immigration or anything else by “advocating internationalism and anti-Americanism”, you’d best look elsewhere. In the immortal words of Bob Dylan “it ain’t me, babe; it ain’t me you’re looking for babe …”

 

[geezerbob]

In common usage, “American” refers to a citizen of the United States. While you are technically right about residents of Central and South America being Americans, you’re splitting hairs and getting your grammatical correctness on the same plane as political correctness.

 

[Bennie_P]

In common usage, “American” refers to a citizen of the United States. While you are technically right about residents of Central and South America being Americans, you’re splitting hairs and getting your grammatical correctness on the same plane as political correctness.

We can solve that problem, lets invade Central America make our border at Panama and start selling resort lots along the coast to pay for the invasion. Smaller Border to protect, more land for speculation, more oil within our borders, etc. We need to finish the job we stated in 1846. We can build the Army to do the job by offering citizenship to any illegal or other potential immigrant from Mexico and Cental America.We got to start thinking offense not defense.

 

[jabelltulsa]

They are limited in their “right to protest” in that they cannot violate the rights of others. In so doing, I think they show as much disrespect for the law as vigilantes who take the law into their own hands.

We are in complete agreement on this. We as citizens need to rely on our law enforcement for these types of issues.

We have great police officers and strong national guard. They are trained to best enforce the laws that are set down.

I believe, as I think you do, that the offenses and vigilantism should be dealt with harshly. This is a free country, not an anarchy.

I pray for the guidance for our officials and officers, and for the awakening of charity in the hearts of all these protesters who see fit to hurt others.

 

[sprout]

The people of Mexico, Central America, and South America, unfortunately need to rise up and change their governments. As long as they have a way up and out, they will take it. I have been to Mexico. I have seen the corruption. I have seen the poverty.

People from this region have a beautiful culture, and wonderful lands; they are also wonderful people. I pray that they will rebuild their countries so that they will serve the people instead of oppress them.

Since Mexico and Central America are such close neighbors to the US I wonder if one of the reasons this hasn’t happened is because the US doesn’t want to risk another Mexican Revolution. Who knows what party or faction would “take over” and they could end up with a marxist ruler like Hugo Chavez (speaking of which here’s a sidenote on Chavez replacing “the Virgin” with Che Guevara magicstatistics.com/2007/07/16/chavez-replaces-virgin-mary-with-che-guevara/)).

It’s kinda the same here in the US with our welfare system, which I was taught is the price government pays to keep the poor from rising up against them.

The US has engaged in some very dirty-handed dealings with our neighbors to the south with NAFTA, CAFTA, the World Bank loans:

When he asked that the process of debt cancellation and reduction for the poorest countries be continued and accelerated, Pope Benedict XVI insisted that these processes must not be made conditional upon structural adjustments that are detrimental to the most vulnerable populations (see below).

{snip}

In a desperate attempt to delay this burgeoning global debt crisis, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund stepped in, offering to effectively bail out the commercial banks. Essentially, the World Bank and the IMF offered to provide debtor countries with the necessary loans to enable them to continue servicing their debt, provided that they “adjusted” their economies according to specific policy requirements. These requirements soon came to be embodied in country-specific Structural Adjustment Programs (SAP’s) and were reflective of a concomitant neoliberal revolution in economic thought (called neoconservatism in the United States). Thus, in negotiating SAP’s, the IMF and/or the Bank typically dictated (and continue to dictate) a number of supply-side and trade liberalization measures, such as privatization, currency devaluation, price decontrol, export incentives, decreased government spending, and exchange rate flexibility.

In most countries, the SAP’s have intrinsically favored the “comprador” class, comprised of professionals, businessmen, technocrats, and other Northern-educated elites. Corporations and private industries, who are given free reign of the land under the “invisible hand” ideology of adjustment, have crowded out the public sector and many small, locally-owned businesses.

Of even further detriment to the lower classes are the drastic cuts in social services that typically accompany adjustment. Many governments have been forced to decrease spending in areas such as health care and education in order to comply with SAP-imposed budgetary restraints.

In order to respond to their demands for increased exports, many Third World countries undergoing SAP’s have been forced, to divert resources away from small-scale, domestic food production into giant commercial farms, most of which are owned by US-based multinational corporations. cjd.org/paper/insists.html

 

[Moneo]

In common usage, “American” refers to a citizen of the United States. While you are technically right about residents of Central and South America being Americans, you’re splitting hairs and getting your grammatical correctness on the same plane as political correctness.

Ohhh. Common usage. Nothing wrong with that, but then common usage doesn’t equal true or right either.

And it isn’t a techinicality: they occupy the American continents, therefore they are Americans. You see, it seems to me that denying the other, roughly 592,908,987 inhabitants who live in the rest of the countries in the Americas the right to call themselves Americans simply because they aren’t U.S. citizens smacks of more than a little chauvinism, common usage or no.

But that’s just me.

 

[geezerbob]

Sprout, I’m afraid you were taught wrong. The welfare system didn’t exist at all prior to the New Deal in the thirties, and it was minimal until LBJ’s Great Society. There was no revolt of the poor. There was scattered violence against the injustices practiced by the steel companies, coal companies and railroads, but, for the most part, people learned to make do with and be thankful for what little they had. When I was a child, my family was probably considered working class, but would be considered destitute today. Yet, everybody was happy.

 

[geezerbob]

Ohhh. Common usage. Nothing wrong with that, but then common usage doesn’t equal true or right either.

And it isn’t a techinicality: they occupy the American continents, therefore they are Americans. You see, it seems to me that denying the other, roughly 592,908,987 inhabitants who live in the rest of the countries in the Americas the right to call themselves Americans simply because they aren’t U.S. citizens smacks of more than a little chauvinism, common usage or no.

But that’s just me.

In language, common usage eventually determines correctness. See the dictionary.

 

[sprout]

Ohhh. Common usage. Nothing wrong with that, but then common usage doesn’t equal true or right either.

And it isn’t a techinicality: they occupy the American continents, therefore they are Americans. You see, it seems to me that denying the other, roughly 592,908,987 inhabitants who live in the rest of the countries in the Americas the right to call themselves Americans simply because they aren’t U.S. citizens smacks of more than a little chauvinism, common usage or no.

But that’s just me.

I don’t think it’s just you. I’ve heard this complaint about the use of “American” by just about every foreigner I’ve disscussed it with, especially our neighbors from the south.

Even Wikipedia refers to this:

While many in the United States of America generally refer to the country as America and themselves as Americans,[29] many people elsewhere in the Americas resent what they perceive as appropriation of the term in this context and, thus, this usage is frequently avoided.[30][31][32] In Canada, their southern neighbour is seldom referred to as “America” with “the United States”, “the U.S.”, or (informally) “the States” used instead.[31]

so it’s not just you!

Wikipedia also gives a bit of history about the naming:

The earliest known use of the name America for this particular landmass dates from April 25, 1507. It appears on a globe and a large map created by the German cartographer Martin Waldseemüller in Saint-Dié-des-Vosges. An accompanying book, Cosmographiae Introductio, explains that the name was derived from the Latinized version of the explorer Amerigo Vespucci’s name, Americus Vespucius, in its feminine form, America, as the other continents all have Latin feminine names.[11]

So the name of the American continent predates the United States by close to 3 centuries!