Illegal immigrant rights

[Fremont]

they are obliged to respect the laws when they ARE HERE. How can you argue that they not be here yet argue that when they are here to respect the laws? Makes no sense. The Church is teaching that these humans being seeking to survive are to be welcomed and if they are here they are to respect the laws that all the citizens follow.

You may be splitting hairs.

But you are right, immigrants can only be expected to honor employment laws, tax laws, etc. after they are here.

Immigration laws apply to those who are not here yet but wish to be. I do not believe the Church endorses violation of these laws or encourages people to do so.

The topic is what the Church teaches. The catechism clearly defends these human beings that come into the country to survive.

I do not believe that most illegal immigration is a matter of survival. When survival is really an issue the US has been quite generous in providing exception to the normal immigration process. A good example was the very large number of immigrants from Vietnam in the 1970’s and 1980’s.

The most generous? No it is not. One of the most, yes. Again, you asked us defend the Church’s defense of immigrants entering a country without proper documentation in order to survive, and I have provided the documentation.

The 2005 figures for foreign aid show the US at $27.5 million, Japan at 13.1 million, UK at 10.7 million, France at 10 million. That looks pretty generous to me.

In addition there is the private donations by the US people; as groups, as individuals, as corporations, etc. Last year that was $34 billion – yes Billion.

You may be right that some other countries total official and private generosity exceeds that of the US but I sure would appreciate it if you would share your data.

Yes I did indeed asked for specific information that shows that the Church endorses illegal immigration. I guess I am too thick headed to see any yet.

You were kind enough to post part of our Catechism – but it shows that the US, as well as any other country, has the right to control immigration. I cannot see anything in that post, or any other post of official Church policy, where the Church says any and all are free to ignore or violate those controls.

 

[Jeffrey]

Where in my post did you see me say ( or type technically ) vigilante justice? No where.

People are deported every day Are you supporting vigilante justice?

 

[Fremont]

the CHURCH defends humans entering a country illegally when it is a matter of survival.

You keep talking about a “matter of survival”.

Where do you get this? It would be quite helpful if you could show the source of how illegal immigration from Mexico or anywhere else is a matter of survival.

What do you mean by “survival”?

Has the Mexican government declared there is a threat to the survival of their people?

Has the World Health Organization declared there is a threat to the survival of the Mexican people?

Has any other UN organization or other human rights organiization declared there is a threat to the survival of the Mexican people?

Has the Church declared there is a threat to the survival of the Mexican people?

If so they sure have kept this a pretty good secret. I am not aware of any such declarations in the media or at Mass.

What is the threat to survival that can only be alleviated or avoided by illegal immigration to the US?

Most people who enter the US illegally are healthy and robust. What is the threat to their survival?

Most wish to improve their quality of life but that is not a matter of survival.

 

[Fremont]

People leave their home and family to travel for work, their work improves the living standards of a person named Fremont. Yet Fremont is terribly upset about it -why?

Various points about why illegal immigration is wrong have been posted numerous times in various threads of this forum.

A quick summary is: first, it is illegal to enter the US, and most other countries, without permission and second, once here illegal immigrants inflict a variety of harms on our community. These range from public health issues to unfair burdens on our health and educational systems to tax evasion. I will not try to repeat the details here.

The US has the most generous immigration laws of any country in the world and provides significant preferences to our neighbors to the south. I certainly welcome those that wish to immigrate to the US and improve their lives and my life in a legal and moral way.

I will just say that I am proud of the USA and I am proud to be an American. I have strong objections to illegal immigrants who scoff at our laws and insult our principles.

 

[Fremont]

What Pope? What is your documentation of this claim?

I do not wish to get off topic here but if you are really interested in the role Rome played in helping Nazis escape, a program commonly called Odessa, here are a couple of references.

hist.academic.claremontmckenna.edu/jpetropoulos/holocaust/aftermathintro.htm

jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/odessa.html

telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/13/wnazi13.xml

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Only if they are here legally… if not… deport them. Illegals have no rights here.

Where in my post did you see me say ( or type technically ) vigilante justice? No where.

In Post #18 you say they have NO RIGHTS so you were asked a question. Some people of various psychological impairments use opportunities as this to unleash their problems. So when they go to the border and kill, terrorize, or do unspeakable actions will you continue to say there in no legal grounds for prosecution, as those victims have no rights. Similarly when money lovers steal or cheat these immigrants far from the border will you continue with this idea there is no legal base because the people have no rights.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Various points about why illegal immigration is wrong have been posted numerous times in various threads of this forum.

That was post #8 was asking you about

… second, once here illegal immigrants inflict a variety of harms on our community. These range from public health issues to unfair burdens on our health and educational systems to tax evasion…

this can be an emotional statement but it is factual incorrect which is the reason you were asked in post #8 why you stay stuck on the idea illegal is illegal

 

[Jedi_Master]

The 2005 figures for foreign aid show the US at $27.5 million, Japan at 13.1 million, UK at 10.7 million, France at 10 million. That looks pretty generous to me.

In addition there is the private donations by the US people; as groups, as individuals, as corporations, etc. Last year that was $34 billion – yes Billion.

You may be right that some other countries total official and private generosity exceeds that of the US but I sure would appreciate it if you would share your data.

In terms of traditional foreign aid, the US gave $16.25 billion in 2003, as measured by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the club of the world’s rich industrial nations. That was almost double the aid by the next biggest net spender, Japan ($8.8 billion). Other big donors were France ($7.2 billion) and Germany ($6.8 billion).

But critics point out that the US is much bigger than those individual nations. As a group, member nations of the European Union have a bit larger population than the US and give a great deal more money in foreign aid - $49.2 billion altogether in 2003.

In relation to affluence, the US lies at the bottom of the list of rich donor nations. It gave 0.15 percent of gross national income to official development assistance in 2003. By this measure, Norway at 0.92 percent was the most generous, with Denmark next at 0.84 percent.
csmonitor.com/2005/0106/p16s01-cogn.html

Yes I did indeed asked for specific information that shows that the Church endorses illegal immigration. I guess I am too thick headed to see any yet.

You were kind enough to post part of our Catechism – but it shows that the US, as well as any other country, has the right to control immigration. I cannot see anything in that post, or any other post of official Church policy, where the Church says any and all are free to ignore or violate those controls.

It shows that it has the right to control immigration, and I have stated the same. But to go as far as calling these poor people CRIMINALS, LEECHERS, ANCHOR BABIES, and other derogatory names all because the majority come here to just live is rather shameful. It is shameful to me that Catholic Americans have resorted to such name calling towards their less fortunate Catholic brethren. The Church has defended these immigrants because they are in need of help. This country is very capable of allowing these people to stay, but unfortunately we have a president that thinks it’s more important to force a foreign country to adapt their political views and government format while throwing billions and billions of our tax dollars just to see that it will never work (Iraq).

 

[Isidore_AK]

In Post #18 you say they have NO RIGHTS so you were asked a question. Some people of various psychological impairments use opportunities as this to unleash their problems. So when they go to the border and kill, terrorize, or do unspeakable actions will you continue to say there in no legal grounds for prosecution, as those victims have no rights. Similarly when money lovers steal or cheat these immigrants far from the border will you continue with this idea there is no legal base because the people have no rights.

And many illegal immigrants destroy the property of US citizens, steal from US citizens, and sometimes murder US citizens. Not to mention the thriving narcotics and smuggling trade that goes on under the cover of “migrants”.

The very few sick individuals who commit the crimes you mentioned are punished under US law, regardless of who the victim is. BUT the illegals do NOT get punished in any meaningful way, even when they are caught.

We need to enforce the laws already on the books. Build a friggan wall already…good fences make for good neighbors. Fine employers who hire illegal’s in such a manner that they are encouraged to stop immediately (say, a $1000 a day, per illegal employee fine). I have no problem with legal immigrants. If you want to gain citizenship, follow the rules. I don’t care where you are from, follow the stinkin rules (hey! Sounds like my gripe with liberals who abuse the liturgy…what a coincidence! But I digress…)

 

[Texas_Roofer]

And many illegal immigrants destroy the property of US citizens, steal from US citizens, and sometimes murder US citizens. Not to mention the thriving narcotics and smuggling trade that goes on under the cover of “migrants”.

Is this rare or common? does it exceed the normal rate of U.S. Citizens?

The very few sick individuals who commit the crimes you mentioned are punished under US law, regardless of who the victim is.

Really, has anyone been prosecuted for killing a plant see plants have NO RIGHTS. Most legislative bodies have extended some legal rights to animals, hey but that is animal not immigrants. Now it is illegal to beat your horse. I am not a lawyer but the legal base to prosecute when NO RIGHTS were violated seems weak

 BUT the illegal's do NOT get punished in any meaningful way, even when they are caught.

so are you saying they stopped imprisoning them and then deporting them after their sentence? When was that change made?

We need to enforce the laws already on the books. Build a friggan wall already…good fences make for good neighbors.

you have my support here

Fine employers who hire illegal’s in such a manner that they are encouraged to stop immediately (say, a $1000 a day, per illegal employee fine).

Would it matter if the employer knew? What if the employer even collected the documentation but the documents were false

I have no problem with legal immigrants. If you want to gain citizenship, follow the rules. I don’t care where you are from, follow the stinkin rules (hey! Sounds like my gripe with liberals who abuse the liturgy…what a coincidence! But I digress…)

you have my support here

 

[Fremont]

In terms of traditional foreign aid, the US gave $16.25 billion in 2003, as measured by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the club of the world’s rich industrial nations. That was almost double the aid by the next biggest net spender, Japan ($8.8 billion). Other big donors were France ($7.2 billion) and Germany ($6.8 billion).

But critics point out that the US is much bigger than those individual nations. As a group, member nations of the European Union have a bit larger population than the US and give a great deal more money in foreign aid - $49.2 billion altogether in 2003.

In relation to affluence, the US lies at the bottom of the list of rich donor nations. It gave 0.15 percent of gross national income to official development assistance in 2003. By this measure, Norway at 0.92 percent was the most generous, with Denmark next at 0.84 percent.
csmonitor.com/2005/0106/p16s01-cogn.html

It shows that it has the right to control immigration, and I have stated the same. But to go as far as calling these poor people CRIMINALS, LEECHERS, ANCHOR BABIES, and other derogatory names all because the majority come here to just live is rather shameful. It is shameful to me that Catholic Americans have resorted to such name calling towards their less fortunate Catholic brethren. The Church has defended these immigrants because they are in need of help. This country is very capable of allowing these people to stay, but unfortunately we have a president that thinks it’s more important to force a foreign country to adapt their political views and government format while throwing billions and billions of our tax dollars just to see that it will never work (Iraq).

You can side with critics of the US and use whatever measure of foreign aid suits your ego.

In my view it is the absolute value in dollars or goods or what ever that helps people – and that is the goal.

An illegal immigrant has nothing to do with being Catholic as far as I am concerned.

All illegal immigrants, no matter where they came from, how they got here or what their religious beliefs, violate our immigration laws and continue to violate other laws after they are in the US. This is wrong.

You are getting off topic when you express your far left political views. This forum is about immigration. But to respond, I believe President Bush has done and is doing a great job. It is unfortunate that we cannot elect him for a third term.

 

[Fremont]

That was post #8 was asking you about

this can be an emotional statement but it is factual incorrect which is the reason you were asked in post #8 why you stay stuck on the idea illegal is illegal

It seems silly to repost the same things over and over again. But for your edification you can review the following and maybe you will finally understand. If not, there is not much more I can say.

kyl.senate.gov/print_page.cfm…ter/border.cfm

shelby.senate.gov/public/inde…=&County _id=

thomas.senate.gov/index.cfm?F…Position_id=62

bennelson.senate.gov/news/det…fm?id=249358&&

isakson.senate.gov/press/2005/122605mexico.htm

kyl.senate.gov/print_page.cfm…ter/border.cfm

chambliss.senate.gov/public/i…c-9ee76adf7017

house.gov/list/speech/ca5…in_060828.html

house.gov/list/speech/ga0…Minutemen.html

foxx.house.gov/index.cfm?Cont…k=b&ItemID=366

house.gov/feeney/OviedoVoiceImm.htm

 

[Texas_Roofer]

It seems silly to repost the same things over and over again. But for your edification you can review the following and maybe you will finally understand. If not, there is not much more I can say.

So you found some other people who hate immigrants too, so what. Can you explain why you or these other poeple hate immigrants?

 

[Contarini]

Thank you for your support. I could not have done it better myself.

Your posting from our Catechism clearly supports that nations like the US have the right to regulate immigration – and thus there is no one has the “right” to take up residence in another country based on their unilateral decision.

It does not say that governments have the right to make whatever regulations they choose. And it speaks of “seeking a livelihood” as a legitimate right. This is, of course, vague. Surely the local bishops are the best people to interpret this? And they have clearly interpreted it (for the most part) in a pro-immigration way.

I salute them on this, as on so many other moral issues. It amazes me that people on this forum balk at the consistent moral witness of their own Church, when this is one of the most shining Christian testimonies in the modern world.

Edwin

 

[Fremont]

So you found some other people who hate immigrants too, so what. Can you explain why you or these other poeple hate immigrants?

There is nothing in any of my postings or in any of the references I provided that uses the term “hate”. No one said anything about “hate” except you.

Certainly no one said anything about hating immigrants. I have a great deal of respect for immigrants who enter this country legally and who wish to contribute to our society in a legal and positive way.

Expecting people to respect our laws is not unreasonable. Taking steps to enforce those laws is not unreasonable.

There are many ways to help those in need. Illegal immigration is not one that I support.

 

[Fremont]

It does not say that governments have the right to make whatever regulations they choose. And it speaks of “seeking a livelihood” as a legitimate right. This is, of course, vague. Surely the local bishops are the best people to interpret this? And they have clearly interpreted it (for the most part) in a pro-immigration way.

I salute them on this, as on so many other moral issues. It amazes me that people on this forum balk at the consistent moral witness of their own Church, when this is one of the most shining Christian testimonies in the modern world.

Edwin

US immigration laws are reasonable and just. The US welcomes over 1 million legal immigrants every year – many more than any other country in the world.

Expecting all those who wish to immigrate to the US to follow our laws is not unreasonable.

Local bishops? You have to be kidding.

They emphasize why I am so very grateful that we have the rule of law in the US and not the rule of men, laws that apply equally to everyone.

These are the guys that aid child-abusing priests and then use donations from the faithful to bribe the victims and their families to not tell the police. They then lied repeatedly to the police and the community about what they had done.

They have repeatedly shown a distain and lack of respect of our laws.

I sure do not want such people making public policy.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

There is nothing in any of my postings or in any of the references I provided that uses the term “hate”. ** No one said anything about “hate” except you.**

Certainly no one said anything about hating immigrants. I have a great deal of respect for immigrants who enter this country legally and who wish to contribute to our society in a legal and positive way.

Expecting people to respect our laws is not unreasonable. Taking steps to enforce those laws is not unreasonable.

There are many ways to help those in need. Illegal immigration is not one that I support.

Thanks actually most of the reference you posted do not work, of the ones that did they are Political speak for people ho hate immigrants. Simply I am not a Politician so I can simply call it for what it is. By the way did you read from those sites you posted where the minute man were 2/3 armed, one guy had an M-16, and one group appeared “racist” and one person was deemed “emotionally disturbed”? So the Minutemen want us all to know the people the Minutemen view as “racist” and “emotionally disturbed” are not part of there group. See the Minuteman can be judge and jury too isn’t that great. Also did you catch that the minute man did not call the law enforcement nor citizen arrest the armed racist group - See they are concerned about THAT KIND OF LAWLESSNEES at the border. Thanks for your post

 

[Jeffrey]

Your spin and false acusations won’t work.

So you found some other people who hate immigrants too, so what. Can you explain why you or these other poeple hate immigrants?

 

[Walt_Oliver]

WARNING

---

This thread is drifting into sniping between members rather than discussing the topic of the thread. It will be closed if this continues. Please return to the topic of the original post. Thanks.

Walt

 

[Fremont]

Thanks actually most of the reference you posted do not work, of the ones that did they are Political speak for people ho hate immigrants. Simply I am not a Politician so I can simply call it for what it is. By the way did you read from those sites you posted where the minute man were 2/3 armed, one guy had an M-16, and one group appeared “racist” and one person was deemed “emotionally disturbed”? So the Minutemen want us all to know the people the Minutemen view as “racist” and “emotionally disturbed” are not part of there group. See the Minuteman can be judge and jury too isn’t that great. Also did you catch that the minute man did not call the law enforcement nor citizen arrest the armed racist group - See they are concerned about THAT KIND OF LAWLESSNEES at the border. Thanks for your post

The purpose of the references I posted was to illustrate the basis for my position on illegal immigration in response to your request.

The Church defines Hate as wishing evil on another and desiring great harm to them. There is nothing in any of the references that state any such thing. To profess you can see into someone else’s soul and see hatred is at least a bit presumptuous. Hate is a very serious matter in my mind and your charges are unjust and unfounded.

I do not know where you are coming from but as far as I know the only reference I posted that says much about the Minuteman organization is the one shown below. I find nothing in that reference stating anything about M-16 weapons, racist elements or emotionally disturbed people.

The point discussed in that reference is that enforcement does work and significantly reduces illegal immigration. Further there are references about how Minuteman members give aid – water, food, etc. – to illegals trying to sneak into the US. Of course then they report them to US officials.

One interesting mention is that Mexican officials discourage potential illegals from trying to cross the US border where the Minuteman group is patrolling.

That is great, the more discouragement the better. That is the purpose of the Minuteman organization. It also shows that Mexican officials can discourage illegal immigration attempts if they want to.​

Rep. Charlie Norwood

After decades of being told that it is impossible to stop illegal immigration on the Arizona border, it has been all but halted since April 1 through the very means we were told wouldn’t work – dedicated manpower and willpower.

house.gov/list/speech/ga0…Minutemen.html