Immigration, Deportation, and Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter richardacombs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
graciew said:
It happens now that when a person is caught in an infraction and this person is illegal,she or he is deported.The issue arises when this person is leaving children behind.here there are two decisions to make 1.what is done with the children,many of which are american citizens(“anchor” children or not) 2.what will be done from now on with children born here from illegal parents. In both cases,human rights for children are involved.
Click to expand...
I have often thought about this because the innocent are the ones to suffer. But the consequences of sin and our personal choices often do hurt others. We are all on a journey and must be responsible for our own actions; indeed, that is what the Lord will solely judge us on. Parental obligation to protect their children is primary. Surely these parents knew the risks they were taking when they freely made the choice to initially enter illegally (dangerous in and of itself.) Many have had children after arriving here and I cannot believe they were innocently unaware of those risks as well. They, themselves have put their own children in a position of peril. Where does their personal responsibility in this lie? Being true parents with all that entails cannot be left at any border. On a side note – there is no reason for children to be left behind. I believe that as the law now stands, those anchor babies do not lose their citizenship if they return home to Mexico with their parents.
 
d97c said:
Where is your proof that the current immigration law is “immoral.” If you cite any facts, maybe we can begin a discussion.

What about the American poor in the
9.5% unemployment we have?? What about helping those poor before you open the gates and let in illegal workers? What about making employers stop paying illegal aliens under the table cash? Do you think the illegals do anything “immoral?”
Click to expand...
“Proof” never exists. One can offer evidence or argument, but the term proof will seldom apply to anything in politics. Here is the data I offer.
foreignborn.com/visas_imm/immigrant_visas/10preference_system.htm
What are the Employment-Based Preference Categories?All people who want to become immigrants and obtain a Green Card based on employment must wait for an immigrant visa number to become available according to the following preferences:
First Preference (EB-1 Visa): Priority Workers including aliens with extraordinary abilities, outstanding professors and researchers, and certain multinational executives and managers.
Second Preference (EB-2 Visa): Members of Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of Exceptional Ability.
Third Preference (EB-3 Visa): Skilled Workers, professionals and other qualified workers.
Fourth Preference (EB-4 Visa): Certain special immigrants including those in religious vocations.
Fifth Preference (EB-5 Visa): Immigrant Investors creating employment
Click to expand...
We have built into the law a discrimination against those who are manual labors. That this is immoral, we need look no further than the social doctrine of the preferential option for the poor. Pope Paul VI taught.
web.archive.org/web/20060107004234/www.osjspm.org/cst/oa.htm
In teaching us charity, the Gospel instructs us in the preferential respect due to the poor and the special situation they have in society: the more fortunate should renounce some of their rights so as to place their goods more generously at the service of others.
Click to expand...
This is the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church in the area of social justice. Current immigration law has prefernce against the poor. Therefore, I call it immoral. I do not claim this is proof, but this is my evidence.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_social_teaching#cite_note-33
 
Why is it so difficult for some to grasp that the issue at hand is not immigration per se or even illegal immigration? It is entitlements.

A certain poor man–let us say an alien–fell among robbers and was beaten and then abandoned along the road. A Samaritan, coming upon him, bound his wounds and brought him into his own home to care for him. He treated him, and even paid him a stipend for some odd jobs. While recovering, the injured alien discovered a vault wherein the Samaritan kept the money he had saved, over a lifetime of work, to live upon during his old age. (The Samaritan had budgeted just enough to take care of his anticipated living expenses, his medical care, his grandchildren’s education and so forth.) The alien, of course, demanded his share of this reserve. “Why should I not have a portion for my living expenses as well,” he said? “I worked for you! I performed jobs you wouldn’t do! And what about my health care and my children’s education! Now that I am in your home, are you telling me you are so selfish that you intend to keep this savings for yourself?”

The Samaritan was deeply concerned. What was his duty? He went before the Sanhedrin and related his dilemma. The elders rubbed their hands together in thought, and then proposed a system of taxation to provide a “safety net” for the elderly such as the Samaritan. As an added expression of their compassion, they included the occasional needy alien under their benefit scheme as well. The plan was duly approved, and soon every citizen was paying into a fund set up by the government to care for people in their old age.

The Samaritan returned to his home where he addressed the alien: “My faith teaches that I must care for you, and so I did,” he said. “However I did not anticipate that in doing so I would become obligated to you for a share of all I had saved over a lifetime of industry and thrift. That was an impossible situation, and I was concerned. But fortunately the government in its wisdom has conceived a way to force everyone else in the land to pay what you have demanded. So our problem is solved.”

The alien was astonished, and immediately sent for his family and friends. “Come quickly,” he wrote. “These people are crazy. As soon as you get across the border they will begin giving you their life savings. Hurry! This can’t last!” Before long every Samaritan in the land had his own personal alien to look after. Or rather, they all had to contribute, as a matter of law, to the care of 14 million aliens who quickly entered their land. The Samaritan was proud of himself. “See what a generous people we are, he proclaimed!”

On its face, the bishops humanitarian position with respect to immigration is entirely Catholic and reasonable. But only if you ignore the trillions of dollars in taxes American citizens have paid into entitlement programs over the last 60 years, and the massive debt they have accumulated. Americans are now the poorest people on earth. Others have nothing at all. But each American owes, aside from his personal debt, hundreds of thousands in future taxes to insolvent government programs that continue to grow. When the bishops demand that we deliver our national savings to interlopers who contributed nothing to it, they have moved from religion into politics and their opinion is neither reasonable nor binding.
 
Hi, D97c,

Some things can not be proven - especially when there is such poverty of data on every side of the question.
d97c said:
Where is your proof that the current immigration law is “immoral.” If you cite any facts, maybe we can begin a discussion.

The inability to “…cite any facts…” plagues us all - we are drowning in a series of anecdotal waves.

What about the American poor in the
9.5% unemployment we have?? What about helping those poor before you open the gates and let in illegal workers? What about making employers stop paying illegal aliens under the table cash? Do you think the illegals do anything “immoral?”
fairus.org/site/PageServe…suecenters5e3f
Click to expand...
In all honesty, while US unemployment is distressing - in my opinion, bringing this topic up in this therad is almost a ‘red herring’ - a real distraction. Morality - or the lack of it - stands on its own two feet for all to look at either in awe or disgust.

Human nature and life itself is very complex - few have such purity of motives that every day actions are totally pure and eevid of any mischief. At least that is my view having looked at my behavior for over sixty years! 😃 While I am confident that:D honest and objective data is obtainable - and real conclusions can be drawn from this after proper anaysis - I think that this issue is not going to lend itself to something like 90%:villans and 10% victims - or vice versa. People do things for a variety of reasons - and we will just have to make do with evaluating thi:ps reality as best we can. Now, when it comes to evaluating moral actions, I think we have a better chance… and that is with the guidance of the Church.

God bless
 
Stonehouse said:
Why is it so difficult for some to grasp that the issue at hand is not immigration per se or even illegal immigration? It is entitlements.
Click to expand...
It is “difficult to grasp” because I do not see this as the issue. Welfare, entitlements and social programs are two separate issues. Even each entitlement is an issue to itself. I am very pro-immigration, but very anti-entitlement, for example. We use terms like “the left” and “the right”, but most people do not fit into monolithic categories. Indeed, I think you have a great idea for a discussion, but it is not this discussion.
 
What other laws can I violate and be given the support of the Catholic Bishops? What other groups other than LEGAL immigrants can I disregard in favor of those who violate laws of this nation? How are either of those acts “Christian?” We dont need to intentionally import any more poor people in this nation. Our citizens need the jobs, money, health care, free education, and availability at free health clinics. We dont need any more poor. Tax payers can not afford it.
 
Hi, Tigg,

Excellent post 👍

The entire idea of personal responsibility seems to get swept under the rug - the issue of, “What happens to the children?” is squarely addressed to those xenophobic deporters that actively seek out families to separate if not destroy! :eek: Yeah…right! 😦

But, it should be known that, at least in my opinion, the term “Anchor Children” is truly both hateful and profoundly disturbing. These children are US Citizens - and, as such, deserve the full protection of the US government - and, includes stopping those in authority from such shameless bullying and name calling against innocent children.

God bless
Tigg said:
I have often thought about this because the innocent are the ones to suffer. But the consequences of sin and our personal choices often do hurt others. We are all on a journey and must be responsible for our own actions; indeed, that is what the Lord will solely judge us on. Parental obligation to protect their children is primary. Surely these parents knew the risks they were taking when they freely made the choice to initially enter illegally (dangerous in and of itself.) Many have had children after arriving here and I cannot believe they were innocently unaware of those risks as well. They, themselves have put their own children in a position of peril. Where does their personal responsibility in this lie? Being true parents with all that entails cannot be left at any border. On a side note – there is no reason for children to be left behind. I believe that as the law now stands, those anchor babies do not lose their citizenship if they return home to Mexico with their parents.
Click to expand...
 
d97c said:
The line that legal immigrants are in now…following the laws…waiting their turn…getting here according to the laws of the host country. THAT line !
Click to expand...
Did you read my post? For most of the people illegally crossing the border, there is no line that they can join. If you’re poor, have no parents/spouse here and have no specialized education/training there is not legal path to immigrate here, period.
 
So seekerz, your concept says,"If there is a law that I dont like, and I think it is immoral, and I think I can better myself by violating it, and it doesnt matter that I am cheating, then I can DO WHAT I WANT??? If thats ok for your illegals to do, is it ok for someone else to do if they have decided that their personal situation and financial condition can be improved??
Thats your way to serve the “common good.”
When the Catachism says “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,” (2241), does that refer to the illegal aliens who REFUSE to OBEY the laws?? Sure it does.
Oh yes there is a line they can get in. Its the same line you and I and everyone else who is a Catholic respects when we want something. We dont CHEAT to satisfy our immediate wants and cut in front of someone else, or act selfishly. We respect the laws. We dont steal because WE think WE need soemthing or want to benefit ourselves. Why dont the Mexico Bishops
do something about Mexico? Mexico was not always a place where millions couldnt wait to get OUT of. So
  1. How many millions more do you want to let in here? As many as can crawl across?
  2. Are you going to pay to take care of them? or are you going to dump that on the tax payers? How many more taxes do you want OTHERS to pay for Mexican poor when we have poor CITIZENS who need jobs and the opportunities.
 
Hi, Seekerz,

I did read your post. I have no idea as to what moral foundation you are building on - and that creates a problem for me. D97c’s question really needs to be addressed, because what I understand you to be saying is that, “If I think this is good for me - then do it - and no one else counts!” is the rationalization for all sin.

How does one safeguard their own legitimate interest if others are free to take them over because they think it is “OK”? There was a previous post that raised a major issue that truly confounds me.

The 1995 letter from Pope John Paul II, “Evangelium vitae”, identifies ‘deportation’ as a serious sin against human dignity. Now, there is no qualifier here, e.g., “mass deportation” (consider what is now being done in France to Gypsies (here is a link: bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-23/french-government-plans-to-deport-850-roma-as-part-of-sarkozy-s-crackdown.html). My understanding of France’s action is that these Gypsies were living in refugee camps, had either not applied for French citizenship or were denied same and because of their breaking numerous civil and criminal laws - they were deported as a group without reference to any specific crime a specific individual may have done. The mass deportation of Jews during WW II would be a more historic example of the same activity - except here we have citizens of the various countries being forced by Nazi military to be deported (to concentration camps and ultimately to their deaths).

And, while I have no trouble making a distinction between ‘mass deportation’ without considereation for the individual differences between people and their individual actions, and simple ‘deportation’ which, to my way of thinking would identify an individual who is not a citizen, has broken at least one law (entering the country illegally) and is being evaluated on the merits of this individual action - with the sepcific focus of sending these people back to where they came from.

The Pope made no such distinction - and this is the problem that I am looking at.

The continued presence of illegal immigrants does not make their stay legal - only lenghtens the time before justice can be brought - and now we have other consequences (e.g., children, born in this country are US citizens - NOT ‘Anchor Children’.)

So, if waiting in line (for legal immigration status) does not appeal, and breaking the law is so much easier, why don’t we all rob banks, seize the personal property of others and claim things that, by right, only belong to citizens? If I understand your rationale as to why standing in line is not the way to go, aren’t you opening up the door to these other illegal actions? I think C97d asked a better question … but, take your pick - answer his or answer mine… 🙂 Somewhere along the line, this issue must be addressed.

God bless
seekerz said:
Did you read my post? For most of the people illegally crossing the border, there is no line that they can join. If you’re poor, have no parents/spouse here and have no specialized education/training there is not legal path to immigrate here, period.
Click to expand...
 
pnewton said:
We have built into the law a discrimination against those who are manual labors. That this is immoral, we need look no further than the social doctrine of the preferential option for the poor. Pope Paul VI taught.

web.archive.org/web/20060107004234/www.osjspm.org/cst/oa.htm

This is the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church in the area of social justice. Current immigration law has prefernce against the poor. Therefore, I call it immoral. I do not claim this is proof, but this is my evidence.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_social_teaching#cite_note-33
Click to expand...
You know, we need a separate thread just for this issue. I can give you a dozen links that contend Gutierrez (the father of lib theology) is the one who coined this phrase, preferential option for the poor (altho one poster gave me history that said this isn’t true.) Even your wiki source above states this if you google liberation theology. Now we know the Marxist parts of that were condemned by JP II as well, and many, including Malachi Martin, a Vatican insider during the 60’s has written extensively of the events in Latin America that support this too, so where do we go from here? That parts of Catholic social justice teaching has been hi-jacked to condemn capitalism is fairly evident. I am suspicious that this term has been altered to fuel that fire. I confess, I don’t understand this and am waiting for clarification. You have posted Octogesima Adveniens which was written nearly 40 years ago. Are we to interpret this ourselves in light of the current political scene?

That you bring this into the immigration issue is confusing to me as well because you also contend entitlements are a separate issue. But entitlements and social programs are what has enticed these people here with all the rights and privileges they do not have in their own country.
 
I would also like to ask:
  1. Is everyone who wants to come to the USA entitled to? How many people who are “needy” can this nation absorb? What is the number after which we say, Whoaaa. Do the folks who want the 12-20 million legalized and cared for (and its reasonable to conclude that millions of these folks will never get off public assistance) agree that there is a limit to the numbers??
  2. What restrictions should we have on immigration?
  3. Over 45% of the illegals who are here have less than a high school education
  4. Assuming they get minimum wage or less than minimum, who will pay for their continued needs which entitlements will provide?
  5. To what extent to the faceless taxpayers of this nation who pay for these illegals’ wants and needs entitled to ANY consideration in this whole equation?
 
d97c said:
Where is your proof that the current immigration law is “immoral.” If you cite any facts, maybe we can begin a discussion.

What about the American poor in the
9.5% unemployment we have?? What about helping those poor before you open the gates and let in illegal workers?
fairus.org/site/PageServe…suecenters5e3f
Click to expand...
97,I apologize if I am not clear,Spanish is my first language.Stick to the lines I have quoted from your passage.
Take this hard time which has to be solved as a challenge to help your people.In positive.
One way of helping the poor visualizing that you are all beginning to have a hard time with recession,is training them as many colleges are doing,in new skills.
Foreign workers,non professional,have been trained in our empoverished south american countries throughout the years to respond to new needs in the market…Empoverishing economies demand new skills.Example from our experience(simple but helps as an example):you will experience a shift let´s say from buying to repairing.When a back pack zipper breaks,you throw it away,buy a new one,it´s cheaper(China?).We don´t.Our kids use the same one,they can be repaired for much less than a new one.Example 2:We do not buy a new pair of shoes,we have skilled shoemenders who repair them.Example 3:when we are shaken by one after the other blow reducing our salaries,the first thing we think as a family of is DO NOT reduce the time or fire the persons who depend on you an have less income(gardener,janitoring,etc),favour them in a class of yet a new skill(computers?)
Foreign poor workers are or will be competing in new skills your workers do not have.This is their strength.Strengthen your workers,help them.
This does not address the morality of illegality but the reality of a way to help poor people to respond to new market demands fulfilled,legally or illegally by foreign or simply other workers.
It means to be a positive approach to your question.
God bless you.
 
Illigal immigrants should not be in the United States. They knowingly broke the laws to be here. They steal from the citizens of the country. Since illegals take services and tax revenues that are forced from the public, the help the illegals receive is not charity. These illegals receive the benefits strickly for political reasons - for politicans to receive votes. Would Jesus support one individual taking the possessions of another because they have the political power to force others to provide these possessions? Can someone break into my home and take what they want, and I am not Christian if I prevent they from doing so - even if they have a need?
Easy answer - ship the illegals back to the country they came from. Have them apply for citizenship according to the rules of the country.
 
Hi, Jseidel,

Welcome to CAF. You have picked a rather interesting thread to begin… I sure you will not have a problem with dull responses! 😃

It is difficult for me to condone those who break the law becasue they see it in their own personal interest to break the law. Couldn’t every criminal say the same thing? It is not as though the US was denying immegration to everyone who asks - the US (just like every other country in the world) has rules that have been developed in the best interest (or at least the preceived best iterest) of the US.

I realize that this is a bit off topic … but… I wonder what the laws are for Central and South American countries and for Canada when it comes to people applying for immegration status. Is the US so different from other countries? I really do not know.

Your participation on CAF will be a beneficial event - many threads to chose from and a wealth of intelligent and wise folks make many contributions.

God bless
jseidel said:
Illigal immigrants should not be in the United States. They knowingly broke the laws to be here. They steal from the citizens of the country. Since illegals take services and tax revenues that are forced from the public, the help the illegals receive is not charity. These illegals receive the benefits strickly for political reasons - for politicans to receive votes. Would Jesus support one individual taking the possessions of another because they have the political power to force others to provide these possessions? Can someone break into my home and take what they want, and I am not Christian if I prevent they from doing so - even if they have a need?
Easy answer - ship the illegals back to the country they came from. Have them apply for citizenship according to the rules of the country.
Click to expand...
 
Easy answer - ship the illegals back to the country they came from. Have them apply for citizenship according to the rules of the country.
Code: 
  Please,explain IN DETAIL the rules of the country where these persons fit in to apply for a chance to enter the country,not to become a citizen.TO ENTER THE COUNTRY TO VISIT DISNEYLAND,let´s say,which they can´t always afford,by the way.Explain IN DETAIL the type of Visa they are requested,and the conditions and clauses,and steps they are to fullfill,to avoid hearing through the loudspeakers "We are sorry,you do not qualify for a US Visa".Expalin in detail,the spot where they fit in. I am sure you know them very well to be so determined to "ship" them and expect they have a chance to ENTER,JUST ENTER this country.
How would you “ship” them in a Christian manner,with or without air conditiong?And the children,will you distribute toys among them before leaving so that they will remember you as a loving Christian?Will you organize a meal for us all to eat caviar and shrimp as a Christian fundraising,so that they can have bread and water for their journey?

And the only thing I agree with you is YES,yours is too easy an answer.
 
Hold on a minute, there, Graciew,

Your ‘easy answer’ is to just let everyone stay who came here illegally.

Of the two ‘easy answers’ I personally think yours has some problems you have deliberately ignored. I invite you to come up with an answer that causes to look at what wholesale invasion of another country really means for the citizens of that country. This is an issue that we are all struggling with - and criticizing the responses of others WITHOUT offering an answer of your own is not honest.

Please, even though English is not your first language, I have not seen any mistakes that totally derail understanding. I would like to invite you to come up with an answer that at least addresses the fact that everyone here illegally actually broke this country’s laws to get here.

God bless
graciew said:
Easy answer - ship the illegals back to the country they came from. Have them apply for citizenship according to the rules of the country.
Click to expand...
Code: 
  Please,explain IN DETAIL the rules of the country where these persons fit in to apply for a chance to enter the country,not to become a citizen.TO ENTER THE COUNTRY TO VISIT DISNEYLAND,let´s say,which they can´t always afford,by the way.Explain IN DETAIL the type of Visa they are requested,and the conditions and clauses,and steps they are to fullfill,to avoid hearing through the loudspeakers "We are sorry,you do not qualify for a US Visa".Expalin in detail,the spot where they fit in. I am sure you know them very well to be so determined to "ship" them and expect they have a chance to ENTER,JUST ENTER this country.
How would you “ship” them in a Christian manner,with or without air conditiong?And the children,will you distribute toys among them before leaving so that they will remember you as a loving Christian?Will you organize a meal for us all to eat caviar and shrimp as a Christian fundraising,so that they can have bread and water for their journey?

And the only thing I agree with you is YES,yours is too easy an answer.
 
Hi, Graciew,

I am not trying to be cute - I am really looking for answers. You bet I have problems with the, “Let everyone who is here stay - and then find a way to let others join them!”

From what I see, none of the ‘source’ countries (Central and South America primarily) have clean hands in this area because money earned in the US is sent back to these countries. While sending money home to family members in need sounds nobel and generous - when you multiply this by millions - you suddenly have an ‘export’ (one’s own citizens) that is producing revenue for the ‘source’ country - and, all that has to be done is not police the borders too well.

Do you have problems with this, Graciew? Probably not. And, there’s the rub. Instead of staying in one’s own country to work out problems - it is run away from them. To claim, “Oh, these problems are too big” - no one has yet to set a manageable size to when someone stands up and does the right thing.

I do not know what country you come from - but, there was an interesting contrast between the nacro-terrorists in Columbia and those in Mexico. It seems like the Columbia crew had gotten totally out of hand - and, in a fight for territory, one group set off a car bomb - in front of a store that was selling school uniforms for young children. Well, this so enraged the Columbians that they started shooting narco-terrorists on sight! They notified the police, and army and were not putting up with this butchery. Guess what? Columbia really doesn’t have narco-terrorists. When we look at Mexico we see what happens when good people trembel in the face of gansters. Narco-terrorism is not only alive and well in Mexico, but it appears to have crippled the government, the press and I just don’t hear a lot from the Chruch. Leaving seems safe - but, these narco-terrorists do nto kow the meaning of national boundries (just like the illegal immigrants!) The only difference here is that the narco-terrorists wants to expand his operations and will come to the US.

Your ‘answers’ are non-answers and play to the cowardice of people who want to do good and fall for the easy way. Your ‘answers’ offer the easy corruption of passive aggressive actions that sap the energy from others. Finally, your ‘answers’ should enable you to more closely examine just what it is you are proclaiming here on CAF - run away from problems…don’t try to make your own country work - abandon it while trying to export the pretense of virtue to other lands. You are sooooooooooooooo right - your ‘answers’ do give me problems… and not just me, either.

Think about it.
graciew said:
tqualey;6983703:
Of the two ‘easy answers’ I personally think yours has some problems you have deliberately ignored.
God bless
Click to expand...
Bet you do have “some problems” with my answers.
God bless
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top