Illegal Immigration

  • Thread starter Thread starter melekali
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hastrman said:
It does not matter. What matters is the emergency, which is not a question of wealth or poverty but of dire peril to life and limb—it is fascinating that you believe that the rich cannot experience such emergencies, but I assure you they can. What strange idolatry of wealth is this, that you believe it to be a magic talisman against the forces of nature?

And I said relative wealth or poverty does not justify “just waltzing into the house”. I did not speak a word about “sheltering in an emergency”, which is a different case entirely. “Sheltering in an emergency” and “just waltzing in” appear to convey two different concepts to me.
Click to expand...
You will note that in my example, I did say I was poor, except for that point in time. Why would you think that I do not believe the rich cannot experience such emergencies? I said nothing along those lines. But the question of wealth or poverty also matters. If someone is so poor as to not to be able to feed his children, he is not stealing by taking your surplus bread. A reasonable person would give the poor person his surplus, so he is allowed to take it without permission. “Thus one in danger of death from want of food, **or **suffering any form of extreme necessity,” I think how poor one is may indicate likehood of extreme necessity.

You are arguing in circles, I made my point.
 
There is NEVER a discussion about this part of the catachism quoted below…how about you folks who cant wait to make this nation borderless having a go at it…
What does the phrase “to the extent they are able” mean??
WHO gets to say that a people of a nation are ABLE…is it a Bishop, or the people who must foot the bill from the “extent” that is allowed??
and …when do these illegals give us the “respect with gratitude”?? When do you open borders folks discuss that?? Is the “respect and gratitude” present when they steal the Social Security numbers so they can undercut the wages of Americans or when they lie so they can steal benefits…WHEN (ooooops…,.sorry PN) does the gratitude come??? HUMMMMMMM???
2241 The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.

Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.
 
tafan said:
You will note that in my example, I did say I was poor, except for that point in time. Why would you think that I do not believe the rich cannot experience such emergencies? I said nothing along those lines. But the question of wealth or poverty also matters. **If someone is so poor as to not to be able to feed his children, he is not stealing by taking your surplus bread. **A reasonable person would give the poor person his surplus, so he is allowed to take it without permission. “Thus one in danger of death from want of food, **or **suffering any form of extreme necessity,” I think how poor one is may indicate likehood of extreme necessity.
Click to expand...
What has this to do with Mexicans illegally entering our country?

The US does have immigration laws that allow for desperate people to come into the country. It’s called the refugee program. Millions of Vietnamese, Bosnian, and African refugees have been resettled into the US. We have taken in Haitians suffering from last year’s earthquake.

Our government determines who needs refuge.
 
qui_est_ce said:
What has this to do with Mexicans illegally entering our country?

The US does have immigration laws that allow for desperate people to come into the country. It’s called the refugee program. Millions of Vietnamese, Bosnian, and African refugees have been resettled into the US. We have taken in Haitians suffering from last year’s earthquake.

Our government determines who needs refuge.
Click to expand...
I was very clear that I did not like the analogy, I was not the one that started it. I was clear that I was only trying to correct a flawed moral argument.

“So while I am not saying that illegal immigration is analogous to this at all” were my exact words in post 184. Of course the person who started it now also denies it is a good analogy.

jeeze…
 
Hastrman said:
Incidentally, the reason trespassing is wrong is because theft is wrong; both are presuming a right to treat others’ property as your own. So you’re right, it’s the seventh commandment (if that’s “Thou shalt not steal”, I get the numbers mixed up), but a more specific violation.
Click to expand...
Trespassing is not theft. Illegal entry into the country is not trespassing, although trespassing may occur.
 
d97c said:
There is NEVER a discussion about this part of the catachism quoted below…how about you folks who cant wait to make this nation borderless having a go at it…
What does the phrase “to the extent they are able” mean??
WHO gets to say that a people of a nation are ABLE…is it a Bishop, or the people who must foot the bill from the “extent” that is allowed??
and …when do these illegals give us the “respect with gratitude”?? When do you open borders folks discuss that?? Is the “respect and gratitude” present when they steal the Social Security numbers so they can undercut the wages of Americans or when they lie so they can steal benefits…WHEN (ooooops…,.sorry PN) does the gratitude come??? HUMMMMMMM???
2241 The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.

Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.
Click to expand...
I did address this from my perspective of the morality of the immigration law. The right to control immigration is not carte blanche. Also, my justification for not capping the number of people who enter legally is specifically aimed at the responsibility immigrants have to shoulder some burden for society.

As to those who enter and have no regard for our society, that is clearly immoral. Those that steal or use false identity, that too is immoral.
 
pnewton said:
Trespassing is not theft. Illegal entry into the country is not trespassing, although trespassing may occur.
Click to expand...
Trespassing is a version of theft, or at least if falls under the 7th commandment. “usurping another’s property against the reasonable will of the owner” is the terminolgy used in te CCC.
 
tafan said:
Trespassing is a version of theft, or at least if falls under the 7th commandment. “usurping another’s property against the reasonable will of the owner” is the terminolgy used in te CCC.
Click to expand...
Legally, it is not.

Here is the chapter from the CCC on the seventh commandment. Trespassing is not mentioned.
usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect2chpt2art7.shtml

I understand the the morality of trespassing is rooted in the seventh commandment, However, it is not the same. The only reason to equate the two, when they are only some what related, is to ramp up the rhetoric. Trespassing on someone’s property, depending on the circumstances, may well be immoral on its own. There is no need for exaggeration and demagoguery.
 
d97c said:
WHO gets to say that a people of a nation are ABLE…is it a Bishop, or the people who must foot the bill from the “extent” that is allowed??
Click to expand...
Well, since it is a question of degree and a prudential calculation of all the factors involved, it is not a moral concern and while the bishops are free to offer their opinions, we are just as free to ignore them in preference to our own informed opinions.

Ender
 
pnewton said:
Legally, it is not.

Here is the chapter from the CCC on the seventh commandment. Trespassing is not mentioned.
usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect2chpt2art7.shtml

I understand the the morality of trespassing is rooted in the seventh commandment, However, it is not the same. The only reason to equate the two, when they are only some what related, is to ramp up the rhetoric. Trespassing on someone’s property, depending on the circumstances, may well be immoral on its own. There is no need for exaggeration and demagoguery.
Click to expand...
Well, we can just let it drop, because there is plenty of exaggeration and demagoguery around these immigration threads without this devolving into the same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top