Immigration, Deportation, and Catholicism

[Tigg]

More illogic. If we extend this reasoning all the way back to the beginning, the only legitimate inhabitant of the planet would have been Adam because he was here first. Even Eve would have been an illegal alien.

 

[graciew]

Nope…you didnt understand. See my selected posts. Read them in order. You CANT come to that conclusion. Im against illegalimmigration, whether from Canada or Mexico, and the reasons I have in detail quoted and cited.
and…so now we are Klansmen, is that right?
So…I hate the poor and I am a Klansman? Right Sonny? That was quite a jump. If I called you that I would be blocked from this forum. Names and labels. I’ll try again since this is a Catholic forum. There are huge problems with ILLEGAL immigration. Im glad we have LEGAL immigration. We need certain amount of legal immigration and we allow certain numbers and other qualifications OTHER THAN JUST NUMBERS so as to not harm the COMMON GOOOD of the nation of U S Citizens… I follow the Catachism which states that we have to accept those who seek a better life TO THE EXTENT THIS NATION IS ABLE. What extent that is is a matter of prudential judgment. Here are a few things to read that support my interpretation of the Catachism’s words, since no bishop has any expertise of what EXTENT immigration should be allowed…legal or illegal. This nation allows more immigration than any nation in the history of mankind. I want you to read some other Catholic writers who dont support all this illegal immigration…
fatherpatrickbascio.com/
vdare.com/walker/091014_bascio.htm
cis.org/catholics-and-immigration

97,I do not understand what “Klansman means nor right Sonny?”.
And if you read and felt I called you names,I do sincerely apologize for it.
Not sharing your position does not entitle me to be offensive.
God bless you.

 

[Tigg]

You bet I have problems with the, “Let everyone who is here stay - and then find a way to let others join them!”

Have we mentioned that this has already been tried and failed dismally? I’m speaking of the l986 amnesty which did nothing to mitigate our immigration problems, and the document fraud continued unabated. Meese (who served under Reagan) stated there was only a temporary 6 month slowdown before illegal entry, once again, became rampant and the federal government, of course, just like now, did not have the will at that time either, to enforce the law. The problem, nearly 25 years later, has now snowballed into the massive numbers we now see.

(And even as we speak, there are reports they are working on a blanket amnesty!)

 

[lhk0pd]

Look i live in a city of 30,000 which is predominitely Hispanic(60%) and they are 90% of the crime here. But it is not the Hispanics that grew up here it has been because of the Meat Plants hiring the illegals and even our Walmart has probably out of the 300 or so employess at least a 100 illegal employees. I know personally some really wonderful illegal people and their families and even then most of them plan to go home once the Mexican economy is better which like i tell them that is never in there life times. But it is the illegals that are doing most of the crime as they only have to run back across the border and wait for things to cool down before coming back. Most of the illegals do not want to learn english but insist we learn spanish and are very racist towards whites. I’ll bet 75% of them have no interest in any Church and seem to lean more towards communism than American ideals. Yet the Church insist we accept them illegal and all. Am i predjudice well think what you want but half of my family is of Mexican descent. These people have a underworld where there able to get about any form of ID they want. A mexican lady i know personally and is 100% American has been fighting the Government now for yrs because some one stole her ID and there areat least one City she is afraid to go to even after talking to the Police there because of a warrant issued for her arrest because of the user of her stolen ID.Is this the America the Church wants us live in? My Mother lives in Phoenix And told me in a recent phone call that the Illegals are setting the houses they lived in before they leave on fire. Of course not all are doing it but it proves the type of people that Arizona was hoping to lose. So call me a bad Catholic or what ever you decide but ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL and they should be deported.

 

[graciew]

My Mother lives in Phoenix And told me in a recent phone call that the Illegals are setting the houses they lived in before they leave on fire. Of course not all are doing it but it proves the type of people that Arizona was hoping to lose. QUOTE BY

I agree with you,and I understand what to live under continuous threat means.I would not call you a bad catholic for requesting urgent official forces response to violent and irrational criminal activity,nor will the Church.It proves not only the pleads of Arizona,but of any person under any flag,to begin any kind of conversation.The violent,and activists and irrational here and anywhere on earth need to be stopped urgently.
And we pray that no child is dragged down into the Hell it means to deal with what he has to deal having nothing to do with it.here,there or anywhere on earth.
God bless you

 

[pnewton]

Your idea that the “…immigration laws are unjust…” is curious and challenging. No examples are given - except they discriminate against the poor. In your response below, you apparently discriminate in favor or workers - with the idea that non-workers are, “… a drain…” No, I did not say that. You are quoting me backwards. I said workers are not a drain. Logic 101. The contrapositive is true, but not the negative of a statement.

As I understand it, no one has a right to trample on the rights of others. All I am asking yoiu to do is address this characterization of US Immigration Laws being ‘unjust’ - with the implication that we do not need to obey unjust laws and therefore anyone is free to break unjust laws and conclude that illegal immigration is not really illegal because of faulty and unjust laws. I identified that this line of reasoning only invites chaos - and, you again chose not to respond. If you want examples of UNJUST immigration laws - look at Nazi Germany.

Nazis, eh. I never said anything remotely like the above statement. In Catholic teaching (that stuff we are supposed to listen to), if one is impelled by conscience to violate an unjust law, he must be willing to suffer whatever punishment comes along. I believe that immigration laws are, in the area of permits, biased and unjust. I understand why the law is broken. At no time did I say I would break the law, or ask others to break it. However, I would vote for a politician, and be in favor of, righting this injustice. It is what Americans do. We can speak out against a law we do not approve of without necessarily advocating lawlessness. In fact, it is the very epitome of lawfulness to seek to make laws more in line with moral teaching. We do not agree on how many should be allowed to immigrate, or what class of person should be allowed inside, but that does not make either of us unlawful.

For the record, I have reported and helped deport many illegal aliens. I am not, or have I ever said, I was above the law, even if I view the law as unjust.

If you do not want to respond, fine.

I hope I have at least put this one issue to rest that I thought the law should be ignored.

 

[Stonehouse]

Hi, Pnewton, “Does any country have a ‘just’ immigration law? I realize that this may sound like a trick question, or a knowledge of international law that defies description - but, the very idea of having a boarder means that not everyone is welcomed to come in. I think any outsider putting a tent or other structure in Vatican City, would quickly meet the business end of the Swiss Guard. People can not barge into another country, make it home and say, “It’s my right! And, oh, by the way you have to take care of me now, too!”. A solid example would go far to make this a pratical discussion.”

This question touches on an interesting point. Why is it that those who most vehemently condemn America for the nation’s past policies with regard to Native Americans are also the most insistent that we should impose no restrictions on immigrants today? After all, if the Indian tribes had not objected to European immigration there would have been no conflict in the first place, and therefore no injustice to the Indians. Just look at all the land the Native Americans held. Never did so few human beings control so much abundance. Yet they stubbornly resisted European immigration, notwithstanding that most of those immigrants were desperately poor and sought refuge from real oppression. As anyone familiar with the history of immigration can tell you, conditions in much of Europe were far worse than they are in Mexico today. What a selfish people the Native Americans were!

For perspective on this situation, two thirds of those who came to America before the Revolutionary War were indentured servants. They toiled as virtual slaves for a period of seven years, after which they were typically paid a musket, a suit of clothing, and a plot of land. They were given nothing. The problem arose when the Indians, out of clannish nativism, attempted to deny the immigrant land claims and block further immigration into their territories.

Please do not tell me that the Indians did not have adequate resources to support these new arrivals! They occupied the entire continent, and yet spitefully begrudged it to a few tens of thousands. The United States today holds only a small part of that continent, and yet has found a way to make room for some 300 million from every corner of the earth.

Some may take the perverse and narrow minded position that the Indians had a right to maintain their culture and their traditional way of life. The way this argument is commonly presented, the Indians should have learned English, supported the European settlers with tepees and buffalo robes and food, and provided all the other services necessary to make the new arrivals comfortable. Any reluctance to do so on their part, any argument that the burden was too great or too sudden, any complaint that their way of life was being irrevocably destroyed–attribute that to their selfishness and their “institutional racism.”

If you are a liberal who believes in amnesty for illegal aliens, then please show us the integrity to extend that same amnesty to the Europeans who immigrated to this land and built our civilization. Stop complaining about our injustice to the Native Americans. Hypocrisy does not complement your argument. Of course the Indians had a right to protect their way of life (and that includes their economy) from being swallowed up by an alien culture. So do we. I once heard an Indian comic put the matter succinctly into perspective. “Next time fight harder!”

 

[602TM]

If a certain law takes effect this week here in Arizona, Catholic priests can be jailed for not verifying immigration status of all parishoners.

100% totally inaccurate. The only time it is required to verify is by the police during a crime. Where do you get your “facts”?
And while I’m at it, I’ll say that I have nothing against an immigrant who wants to come here and contribute, earn, and thus better their new home. What I have a very big problem with is the ones coming here, expecting to have free everything, and sending all their money to Mexico, thus causing DECLINE here in the USA. You need to speak with my MEXICAN sister in law. She’ll tell you how her American dream is being ruined by her fellow Mexicans who are coming here and breaking the American system which she tried for so long to get by coming here legally.

 

[sedonaman]

… Stop complaining about our injustice …

As the pope recently told the Muslim world, stop complaining about 1,000-year-old injustices and just accept history.

 

[sedonaman]

… If a certain law takes effect this week here in Arizona, Catholic priests can be jailed for not verifying immigration status of all parishoners. …

This is worse than the paranoia surrounding the Patriot Act.

 

[d97c]

There are other Catholic writers who oppose illegal immigration on moral grounds.
I want you to read some other Catholic writers who dont support all this illegal immigration…
fatherpatrickbascio.com/
vdare.com/walker/091014_bascio.htm
cis.org/catholics-and-immigration

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Tigg,

YOU’RE WONDERFUL!..and I am sooooooooooo forgetful! Yes, indeed 1986 - here is the link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Reform_and_Control_Act_of_1986

Hey! did everyone else forget this, too?!!! Less than 25 years ago!

For all those who have been saying we are acting immorally with UNJUST laws - did you forget this? Amnesty - a chance at US Citizenship and what have we to show for this today? Not a whole lot - but, abusive talk from those who claim our Immigration Laws are UNJUST.

Now, I realize that this will NEVER STAND the liberal test of authenticity … why? Because we obviously did not do enough in 1986 … why? well… we still have illegal immigrants coming across our boarders today.

Seriously, all of those on the liberal side of this issue - you are seriously encouraged to come up with an argument that addresses this historic fact and reconcile it to today’s immigration mess. It needs to be resolved - but, just opening the books to citizenship somehow isn’t good enough.

God bless

Have we mentioned that this has already been tried and failed dismally? I’m speaking of the l986 amnesty which did nothing to mitigate our immigration problems, and the document fraud continued unabated. Meese (who served under Reagan) stated there was only a temporary 6 month slowdown before illegal entry, once again, became rampant and the federal government, of course, just like now, did not have the will at that time either, to enforce the law. The problem, nearly 25 years later, has now snowballed into the massive numbers we now see.

(And even as we speak, there are reports they are working on a blanket amnesty!)

 

[d97c]

It’s true that most Americans don’t compete with illegal immigrants for work, but millions do. You’d never know that the jobless rate for less-educated and young American workers is twice the national average — 20 percent. Is it really true that none of those people would work in construction or in landscaping or in hotels or restaurants? In fact, virtually all job categories are dominated by native-born workers, so there is no such thing as a job Americans won’t do.

Instead of Obama’s package of amnesty and increased immigration now in exchange for the possibility of enforcement in the future, we need enforcement first and no promises about an amnesty in the future.

Across-the-board enforcement (some thing we’ve never really tried), sustained for eight or 10 years, will result in a substantial reduction in the illegal-immigrant population, as fewer new people sneak in and more who are already here decide to get right with the law and go home. In fact, we’ve already seen the total illegal-immigrant population drop by perhaps 15 per cent since 2007, a trend that began before the start of the recession and was started by the enforce ment measures under taken at the end of the Bush administration.

Only when the political class has proven its commitment to sustained enforce ment can amnesty be considered. Until then, enforcement first.

 

[graciew]

I can tell you that conditions to get a Driver´s licence have changed much.
Three years ago,with my passport,I´-94,Visa,SS number and L1 Visa,and the driver´s test of course…I had my DL
Now a few months ago I had to renew mine and two of my ´boys´ cause we had changed address,and I had to present the previous documentation plus the evidence the L1 was working at present,.As I had to go on different weeks,each week I had to take the evidence written the day before to make sure I was not overstaying.Now my licence is vertical and the word TEMPORARY reads very clearly.
This is to account for some changes you may be interested in hearing.
God bless

 

[sedonaman]

I can tell you that conditions to get a Driver´s licence have changed much.
Three years ago,with my passport,I´-94,Visa,SS number and L1 Visa,and the driver´s test of course…I had my DL
Now a few months ago I had to renew mine and two of my ´boys´ cause we had changed address,and I had to present the previous documentation plus the evidence the L1 was working at present,.As I had to go on different weeks,each week I had to take the evidence written the day before to make sure I was not overstaying.Now my licence is vertical and the word TEMPORARY reads very clearly.
This is to account for some changes you may be interested in hearing.
God bless

All a perceived “oppressed” person need show is a recent utility bill.

 

[pnewton]

Not a whole lot - but, abusive talk from those who claim our Immigration Laws are UNJUST.

Now, I realize that this will NEVER STAND the liberal test of authenticity … why?..
Seriously, all of those on the liberal side of this issue -

FYI - I am neither a liberal, nor have I been abusive. If I have, please report the appropriate post.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Pnewton,

I do not want to stretch a point of logic, but since you mentioned that workers are not a drain (and you dispute that non-workers are a drain) - what was your point?

pnewton:
No, I did not say that. You are quoting me backwards. I said workers are not a drain. Logic 101. The contrapositive is true, but not the negative of a statement.

Nazis, eh. I never said anything remotely like the above statement.

Of course you didn’t, Pnewton, the issue was what do UNJUST immigration laws look like? (I guess you would agree that the Nazi government was VERY UNJUST. So, maybe this was ‘over the top’ when it comes to hyperbolic statements … and, I guess that WW II Italy and Spain were pretty UNJUST when it came to immigration laws, too.

But, this is where I am having trouble… in developed countries (so Somali warlords imposing oppresive conditions on Somali citizens does not count…) who has UNJUST immigration laws? And, what I am talking about is a set of laws that by their very construction, human rights are trampled into the dust at every turn. If there is a human right acknowledged - it was probably a typographical error! Yeah, totally UNJUST LAWS - so bad, in fact that there is a moral duty to promote human rights by violating them.

What I am NOT talking about is in a set of laws there is something you don’t like … or may be even UNJUST in one section - but, the law, taken as a whole, protects the human rights of the majority of people the majority of time. In other words - real world, neither all black or all white - mostly shades of grey when viewed through various lenses.

In Catholic teaching (that stuff we are supposed to listen to), if one is impelled by conscience to violate an unjust law, he must be willing to suffer whatever punishment comes along.

Hold on a minutei, Pnewton, just what do you mean? I have yet to ICE set up a donut and coffee stand inviting illegals to turn themselves in for breaking the law! (I know, you did not say that, either … so you see, I am having trouble really following what it is you are saying - because groups of illegal immigrants make quite a point of evading detection, as do their handlers, kidnappers, low-life employers who cheat them and the whole set of other characters who make this drama in human misery possible).

I believe that immigration laws are, in the area of permits, biased and unjust. I understand why the law is broken. At no time did I say I would break the law, or ask others to break it.

No, you didn’t, Pnewton, but you provide a general quote about UNJUST laws need not be obeyed. So, what kind of conclusion am I to draw?

However, I would vote for a politician, and be in favor of, righting this injustice. It is what Americans do. We can speak out against a law we do not approve of without necessarily advocating lawlessness. In fact, it is the very epitome of lawfulness to seek to make laws more in line with moral teaching. We do not agree on how many should be allowed to immigrate, or what class of person should be allowed inside, but that does not make either of us unlawful.

For the record, I have reported and helped deport many illegal aliens. I am not, or have I ever said, I was above the law, even if I view the law as unjust.

I hope I have at least put this one issue to rest that I thought the law should be ignored.

Now, this is where I ask one of those annoying questions … and, you do not have to answer … but, I think it would be good if you did… Tigg previously mentioned the 1986 attempt under President Regan to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants living in the US, and provide an entry way to US citizenship. No body has said anything about this - and I really think it deserves to be addressed. The offer was made - and apparently, not accepted - for reasons I do not know. The real problem is that it did not seem to work. And while we can spend a lot time criticizing our fedeal government for inept laws … I have never heard of any other country doing this. Have you? To me - this was an ‘a-ha’ moment in this discussion.

God bless

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Graciew,

Many, many years ago… 47 to be exact … I had to bring my birth certificate and one parent along with me to sign up for a Drivers’ Learner’s Permit on my 16th birthday. Oh, and years later, that same birth certificate and a ton of forms - along with a fee - got me my US Passport. Paperwork plagues us all … and, yes, some more than others.

Now, to register my car in Panama when I was a soldier stationed in the Canal Zone (now, it no longer exists - all is part of the Republic of Pamama) - you would not believe all the paperwork I had to show - and, naturally the forms were in Spanish, and everyone spoke Spanish (some also spoke English…) and, it was a lot of work! ;-( And, there was a requirement for me to always carry my Military ID card and for my wife to carry her Dependant ID card. This was NOT an option.

QUOTE=graciew;6992733]I can tell you that conditions to get a Driver´s licence have changed much.
Three years ago,with my passport,I´-94,Visa,SS number and L1 Visa,and the driver´s test of course…I had my DL
Now a few months ago I had to renew mine and two of my ´boys´ cause we had changed address,and I had to present the previous documentation plus the evidence the L1 was working at present,.As I had to go on different weeks,each week I had to take the evidence written the day before to make sure I was not overstaying.Now my licence is vertical and the word TEMPORARY reads very clearly.
This is to account for some changes you may be interested in hearing.
God bless

Thank you for following the law. I am sure that you feel much better for doing it the correct way. You know what I enjoy seeing, are scenes from various places of legal immigrants becoming US Citizens. Truly, this is a heart warming sight for me. All the rhetorical arguments about how UNJUST our laws are - just fold into a pile of empty works when seeing people who have persevered in doing what they need to do to become citizens. And, when you see these pictures, note the different skin colors, the different national clothing some choose to wear -and, if you get audio coverage - the various accents. These are real people who have made more than an effort - they have run the race and finished the course.

God bless

 

[pnewton]

Now, this is where I ask one of those annoying questions … and, you do not have to answer … but, I think it would be good if you did… Tigg previously mentioned the 1986 attempt under President Regan to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants living in the US, and provide an entry way to US citizenship. No body has said anything about this - and I really think it deserves to be addressed. The offer was made - and apparently, not accepted - for reasons I do not know. The real problem is that it did not seem to work. And while we can spend a lot time criticizing our fedeal government for inept laws … I have never heard of any other country doing this. Have you?

No, I have not.

 

[d97c]

Our immigration policy increases poverty, so those who say that we discriminate against poor in any immigration policy are wrong because the result is to increase poverty…any more lax policy on intentionally allowing more poor in here will make OUR CITIZENS poor–er …You see you must look at the common good (another Catholic precept) of all, not just whether a law is allowing more poor into a country that cant take any more poor folks…and whose OWN poor are harmed by the policy admitting more poor folks in--------But ya gotta read the facts to learn----right…here we go-----
heritage.org/Research/Reports/2006/10/Importing-Poverty-Immigration-and-Poverty-in-the-United-States-A-Book-of-Charts