Elimination of U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program “Against the Principles We Have as a Nation” Says Chair of USCCB Committee on Migration

  • Thread starter Thread starter billsherman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

billsherman

Guest
www.usccb.org

Elimination of U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program “Against the Principles We Have as a Nation” Says Chair of USCCB Committee on Migration

WASHINGTON— Thursday it was reported that the Administration is considering “zeroing out” the refugee resettlement program. This would effectively put ...
www.usccb.org www.usccb.org

Responding to this report:


I expect we will see the usual excuses below (“this is only the opinion of one bishop,” “we need better vetting of refugees,” “we can’t take anymore,” “they should fix their own nations,” “I don’t care about them, why should you?”), but the USCCB is on the money here.

Note: Refugees are NOT asylum seekers. They apply for refugee status OUTSIDE the US, and go through a tortuously long process of background checks and interviews (it usually take 2 years). This is just an evil, unChristian policy, designed to further drive home the reality that the Trump Administration doesn’t want immigrants here - of any kind.

A number of supporters of Trump’s immigration policies have said that asylum seekers should apply at the US embassy and wait to be approved. That’s what refugees do, and Trump wants to end that. Do you oppose this policy change, or do you change your opinions to reflect Trump’s new hope?
 
Last edited:
“This recent report, if true,
Click to expand...
now, it may be true, but with the amount of fake news and spin going on…

IMHO, the bishop should have waited to see if it was true

I did not read beyond this line for obvious reasons.
 
I mean, Trump is going to get criticized no matter what he does, so he might as well just end it. If Trump raised the cap, the USCCB would still complain it’s not enough. Might as well just get rid of a potential nuisance of a program that no one is going to give you credit for.
 
tseleehw said:
I mean, Trump is going to get criticized no matter what he does, so he might as well just end it. If Trump raised the cap, the USCCB would still complain it’s not enough. Might as well just get rid of a potential nuisance of a program that no one is going to give you credit for.
Click to expand...
I didn’t see that objection to refugees coming. Wow. I just don’t know what to say in response. I guess we should only help refugees flee war and oppression if Trump gets credit? Nor was I aware that saving people from war was a nuisance.
 
The best official info you can find and the latest is usually in the Department of Homeland Security website and a search in the Federal Register.
This article refers to a report which has unofficial info( not saying it isn t true nor possible nor impossible)about 2020.
If you search the DHS you find procedural changes as third country asylum rule,as a DHS and DOJ joint interim final rule dated July 15 and the document linked which is a 58 page document .

www.dhs.gov

DHS and DOJ Issue Third-Country Asylum Rule | Homeland Security

On July 16th, a joint Interim Final Rule (IFR) issued by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security will publish in the Federal Register.
www.dhs.gov www.dhs.gov

As far as a Presidencial Documents,Executive office,which I searched for official Executive information purposes and their originals, the latest is July 11 and it relates to the Census .


So, these two sources will guide you normally to original documents and official pages updated. .
That is what is official and available to the citizenry and public in general.
Both pages linked contain info about the issue and present situation on immigration.
 
Last edited:
The census question isn’t really as controversial for refugees, who are in the country legally and on a path to citizenship, as it may be for immigrants. And I hate to split hairs, but being a refugee and seeking asylum are, legally speaking, two different matters. Asylees show up at the country and petition to be taken in. Refugees live more in limbo, fleeing their home countries and wait to be transported to a safer and permanent host country. Granted, the Trump Administration is imposing heavy-handed obstacles to admitting refugees and asylees.
 
Kind of expected the type of reaction here if the same thread was posted on World News, but it is interesting (no, distressing) how some here can so easily give more moral authority to Trump than the Church.
 
Last edited:
I just shared the links because I myself find it easier sometimes to go directly to the official documents or sites .I get lost sometimes with foreign reporting particularly because I do not know all the characters involved ( so really they are about all the same for me) , nor follow that closely,and I cannot sincerely perceive the bias or lack of bias to get the basic info sometimes.
The USSCB site was there. With the other links everything was sort of more complete to get the picture and context as to where things are at.
And avoid getting tangled up in “he said , she said. “ .For me…but it may be helpful for others also.
 
Last edited:
DIERM said:
Kind of expected the type of reaction here if the same thread was posted on World News, but it is interesting (no, distressing) how some here can so easily give more moral authority to Trump than the Church.
Click to expand...
It’s a story that may be true, what are you giving moral authority to? A rumor?
 
upant said:
It’s a story that may be true, what are you giving moral authority to?
Click to expand...
The Bishops. The USCCB put out a statement that reaffirms the non-negotiable Catholic position on immigration, especially refugees. The Trump Administration has repeatedly tried to roll back protections for refugees, and the USCCB clearly wanted to get out in front of another attempt.
 
Welcoming the stranger and the foreigner is a strong mandate in Scripture…a commandment in both the Old and New.

Trump supporters told us again and again that they had no issue with legal immigration of refugees etc… if he changes his mind, to whom do they submit… the Church or him?
 
Last edited:
They are blaming trump on a rumor and you wonder why people aren’t jumping on board. What if it isn’t true.
 
Going to strongly suggest one should follow the money. Because there is quite a gravy train from government that the resettlement agencies are helping themselves to. Check this out from the NY Times here:

www.nytimes.com

Welcome, Refugees. Now Pay Back Your Travel Loans. (Published 2019)

Should the nonprofits involved in helping refugees resettle in the United States be acting as debt collectors?
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

So at 25% per loan, of course they are going to toot their own horns and talk up their book under the cover of charitable behavior.

A blurb from the Fraud, Crooks and Criminals blog (formerly Refugee Resettlement Watch) explains a little bit more here:


That blogger has been watching the resettlement scene for many years now and reports a lot more than one will find in the mainstream media.
 
Zzyzx_Road said:
Going to strongly suggest one should follow the money. Because there is quite a gravy train from government that the resettlement agencies are helping themselves to.
Click to expand...
If there is a problem with agencies that resettle refugees, surely the Christian solution is to solve that problem rather than just rejecting refugees, right? I know that’s what you meant, because preventing refugees from coming to the US because NGOs aren’t using money properly would be punishing the wrong people.

There are a lot of people, you excluded of course, who seem to believe that fraud or waste are good reasons to prevent immigration. The proper Christian response, without any doubt, is to remove the fraud and waste, not just tell migrants to shove off.

Oh, and the second link you posted goes to a blog that is run by an anti-immigration activist who appears, from my admittedly cursory search, to oppose all immigration. That is obviously an anti-Catholic position.
 
upant said:
IMHO, the bishop should have waited to see if it was true
Click to expand...
That’s the key issue. This was a proposal in a meeting, nothing more. Don’t our bishops have anything more pressing in their own lane to deal with?
 
MikeInVA said:
Don’t our bishops have anything more pressing in their own lane to deal with?
Click to expand...
You don’t think that caring for migrants, which is commanded by God so many times in the Bible it dwarfs any other moral issue, is “in [our bishops’] lane?”

If bishops can’t speak with authority on the moral issue of migration - again, I am fairly certain it is covered in the Bible more often than any other moral issue - what can they speak on?
 
The real problem is that the economic migrants (and they are mostly economic migrants) have been prioritized over our own local citizens who could have used the help. In other words, I’m being told my neighbors from the other side of the border are of far more importance than my own neighbors on my block. The ones who lost their jobs via cheap migrant labor. And that’s quite a demographic. Which includes me.

In California, they are allocating free medical care for the illegals. What a fabulous deal for them! Subsidize something like that and we’ll get a lot more economic migrant freeloaders. While my old neighborhood in California has plenty of citizens who could use the kind of help that is freely given to the illegals.

Who is my neighbor supposed to be? Why are we pretending that our resources to help these people are unlimited? Why aren’t we looking into spending those resources in the source countries where they would get a lot more bang for the buck? If we’re going to subsidize economic migrants, why can’t we subsidize them in their own countries?

People shouldn’t wonder why flyover citizens go for Trump when they see this kind of deprioritizing their welfare behind the welfare of the economic migrants including the illegal ones.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top