Immigration Rallies Planned Nationwide

[Texas_Roofer]

a hypocrite because on one hand you’re criticizing spoiled americans who want to work for more money yet **you support illegals **who knowingly break the law to work for more money.

Thanks for guessing however you are completely wrong with no chance to be correct. I do not support illegal immigration Natural Law ( God’s Law) supports migration. It is man’s law not God’s which makes the act illegal.

in both cases, you have people who think the world owes them something. .

Says who? you are speaking for others many people I know do not believe the world owes them. They would like people to stop oppressing other people. That is a noble cause. It would seem reading the posts you seem to imply the world owes you and inheritance of the past economic progress of the US? Maybe you pick some enemies and blame them for your…

yes, we are western europeans and if you want to go that route, we all should go back…

Columbus did not receive and invitation, he migrated where and when he chose is there a reason he was different? ( other than being white?)

indigenous people of n. and s. america are decendents of mongolians in asia. they came here from somewhere else too…

So while working to stop migration you seem to admit it is part of God’s plan?

not at all. if you’re honest and truthful, then you don’t break just laws. you respect the values of your host country. something i don’t see with recent hispanic migrants who come here.absolutely!!! that is my whole point. .

The Church teachings are that man’s laws should not violate God’s Law (known as Natural Law) which includes migration and equal opportunity for your bother (the Hispanic is your brother)

they are being decieved to support the liberal progressive left. the people who want no border control are the **same ones who call for marxist reforms **of this country. **they hate the catholic church **and the family. being catholic is no garauntee of orthodoxy. catholic politicans in this country have done a lot of harm, especially the usccb.

Wow you preach Catholism and claim the USCCB is part of the problem. That explains some of the issue. The USCCB along with many Catholics see the teaching of Christ as man helping man in accordance with God’s plan. To draw a line across the dirt and state the people on one side are to have less food, medicine, shelter is not included, and is completely excluded. Thanks for your honest. I do not believe free market principles are accurately described as Marxism. Free Markets do not recognize borders, an issue economist and politician discuss at great length

 

[Ituyu]

absolutely!!! that is my whole point. they are being decieved to support the liberal progressive left. the people who want no border control are the same ones who call for marxist reforms of this country. they hate the catholic church and the family. being catholic is no garauntee of orthodoxy. catholic politicans in this country have done a lot of harm, especially the usccb.

So it seems that you’re not so much concerned with Justice or Right and Wrong but POWER.

 

[Dee_Dee_King]

So it seems that you’re not so much concerned with Justice or Right and Wrong but POWER.

to me justice is also about following just laws and not breaking them–something that millions of migrants are going to be rewarded for at our country’s detrement.

we both agree that workers with a family should make adequate income to support that family. but greedy employeers would rather hire a hard working migrant worker than pay a native a decent salary to provide for his family. it is clear that illegal immigration drives salaries down.

my plan would be to deport every illegal alien and thier family, then have a process for them to get back into the country provided they speak english and they have a skill we need. all illegal aliens who are in jail or who comitted any crimes would be deported permanetly.

i think there should be national guardsmen protecting the entire border to enforce this. this to me is just.

 

[Al_Masetti]

The Heritage Foundation is a highly reputable organization. Folks branding them with prejorative descriptions need to review their actual work.

www.heritage.org

Some of the issues regarding ILLEGAL immigration, and that need to be seriously discussed, include:

1. Lack of enforcement of existing laws … use existing law before imposing new laws (which may be selectively ignored).
2. Amnesty for law breakers
3. Temporary (not permanent) guest workers. The proposed Z-Visas are permanently renewable.
4. No welfare benefits to guest workers
5. No birthright citizenship to children of illegals.
6. No visas to distant relatives.
7. Mandatory health evaluations
8. 12 months for criminal background checks (versus 24 hours in the proposed law … the bureaucracy can’t do much of ANYTHING in 24 hours … particularly international criminal investigations)
9. No in-state tuition for guest workers
10. Encourage immigration for skilled workers rather than unskilled workers.

In an aticle by Robert B. Bluey, May 21, 2007, posted at www.heritage.org “Myth-busting the White House on Immigration”], he discusses ten aspects of the proposed legislation that are mis-understood. Which is easy to do in 320 pages of small print.

Before the people of the United States open themselves up to decades of dramatically increased taxes [would you like to see your Social Security taxes doubled this year and for the rest of your life?], read the analyses by Heritage Foundation.

I was listening to a radio interview by the much-maligned Ann Coulter. She said that her recent article on this immigration has received NO criticism. Check it out at www.anncoulter.com

 

[Ituyu]

to me justice is also about following just laws and not breaking them–something that millions of migrants are going to be rewarded for at our country’s detrement

I have no problems with “Just” laws but the policies that denied these people the opportunity to meet our entry qualifications were purely arbitrary and without justification given that we knew that we need millions more of the unskilled. That has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt by our ability to integrate them into our economy and by our continued low unemployment rate.

we both agree that workers with a family should make adequate income to support that family. but greedy employeers would rather hire a hard working migrant worker than pay a native a decent salary to provide for his family. it is clear that illegal immigration drives salaries down.

 

[Al_Masetti]

The notion of mass deportations is a “straw man” argument.

Illegal immigrants enter AND LEAVE the United States all the time to visit back home. All that is necessary is to enforce existing immigration laws … which we do not now do … require employers to verify U.S. citizenship or U.S. legal status. Without that, the illegals will go home and stay there.

As it is now, some cities have dismembered their vehicle checks because they catch too many illegals.

If local jurisdictions were encouraged to enforce the existing laws [after all Mexico enforces THEIR laws], then the illegals would gradually go home.

Just enforce the existing laws.

I have no problems with “Just” laws but the policies that denied these people the opportunity to meet our entry qualifications were purely arbitrary and without justification given that we knew that we need millions more of the unskilled. That has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt by our ability to integrate them into our economy and by our continued low unemployment rate.

 

[Verisimilitude]

If local jurisdictions were encouraged to enforce the existing laws [after all Mexico enforces THEIR laws], then the illegals would gradually go home.

Just enforce the existing laws.

Some think current US Civil law is immoral, so breaking that law is morally justified. Some think a nation having borders and enforcing control of them against any foreign national wanting to enter, but particularly Mexicans, is against the teachings of the Church. Some think it is immoral to ask a person their nationality and legal status under any circumstance because we are all children of God.

Some think the USA should not discriminate agaisnt migrating people who have no skills or education, no desire or willingness to assimilate into American society, or actual employment needs; much less being a citizen of another nation here without proper authority.

Such discrimination makes people ignorant of the law, bigoted racists, and anti-poor because, presumably, America has no poor of it’s own, everyone is fully educated, fully employed and has affordable healthcare & education.

We have more than we need, and owe much more than we currently give to the indigenous people…correction…all people in the world who can make it to America by any means neccessary.

 

[mary_bobo]

Some think current US Civil law is immoral, so breaking that law is morally justified. Some think a nation having borders and enforcing control of them against any foreign national wanting to enter, but particularly Mexicans, is against the teachings of the Church. Some think it is immoral to ask a person their nationality and legal status under any circumstance because we are all children of God.

Some think the USA should not discriminate agaisnt migrating people who have no skills or education, no desire or willingness to assimilate into American society, or actual employment needs; much less being a citizen of another nation here without proper authority.

Such discrimination makes people ignorant of the law, bigoted racists, and anti-poor because, presumably, America has no poor of it’s own, everyone is fully educated, fully employed and has affordable healthcare & education.

We have more than we need, and owe much more than we currently give to the indigenous people…correction…all people in the world who can make it to America by any means neccessary.

In your mind, breaking the law that YOU think is unjust is NOT morally justifiable. If you don’t like the law, work to get it changed. Meanwhile, don’t try to tell the rest of us that you, or anyone, can break a law with no consequences.

 

[Ituyu]

In your mind, breaking the law that YOU think is unjust is NOT morally justifiable. If you don’t like the law, work to get it changed. Meanwhile, don’t try to tell the rest of us that you, or anyone, can break a law with no consequences.

What do you think Immigration Reform is all about? The problem is that you’ll be very unhappy if and when it becomes a reality because it’s not REALLY about the law or Justice for you, is it?

 

[Verisimilitude]

In your mind, breaking the law that YOU think is unjust is NOT morally justifiable. If you don’t like the law, work to get it changed. Meanwhile, don’t try to tell the rest of us that you, or anyone, can break a law with no consequences.

I think maybe you misunderstood my post. I do not advocate such a incredulous position as the “some” I was referring to in my post.

What do you think Immigration Reform is all about? The problem is that you’ll be very unhappy if and when it becomes a reality because it’s not REALLY about the law or Justice for you, is it?

You are of the “some” I was referring to in my tongue-in-cheek post. If not law or Justice- what is it REALLY about?

I do not think US law is unjust or contrary to my faith and morality as you seem to think it is. I do not think it discriminatory to verify and only hire legal citizens/residents. I do not think it inhumane to restrict finite public funded resources intended for the general public such as education and emergency healthcare requirements by stopping them at the border. The humanitarian exception has become the abused rule.

I think the WWJD question can be applied inappropriately. To say His law is being violated by enforcing US law is a bold claim. What US law violates God’s Law? You think Justice is not being done now because they have rights, but the vast majority of illegals have been denied neither, according to the definitions.

The utopian open-border policy is too dangerous in today’s society too. I don’t think your view of Immigration Reform is either reform or about immigration, but human migration that you sympathize with. And with some friends like this who needs enemies?

 

[meeshy]

my plan would be to deport every illegal alien and thier family, then have a process for them to get back into the country provided they speak english and they have a skill we need.

We need more unskilled laborers than those with skills. It’s a simple fact of our economy at the present time.

Peace,
Meeshy

 

[meeshy]

What US law violates God’s Law?

Lots of them. Legal abortion, for one.

Peace,
Meeshy

 

[Verisimilitude]

Lots of them. Legal abortion, for one.

Peace,
Meeshy

Is that one of the reasons Mexican migrants come here, because abortions are legal? In Mexico City, abortion is no longer illegal If the offense to God (immoral US law) is your major concern, and breaking that civil law to correct that perceived injustice (illegal immigration/migration) is justified in your view, then breaking other civil laws to stop the killing of millions of babies a year would be also justified and maybe serve a greater good.

Any immigration laws that violate God’s law?

 

[meeshy]

I do support breaking civil laws to end abortion. How astute of you to know that.

Are there immigration laws that violate God’s law? Yes. Barring a person from earning a living for his family because of “quotas” definitely is a violation of God’s law.

Peace,
Meeshy

 

[Verisimilitude]

I do support breaking civil laws to end abortion. How astute of you to know that.

How do you do that?
Like this:-?
Violent protests, in the form of arson, firebombing, and vandalism started in the early 1970’s in the U.S. Then, as now, most of the violence appears to be the acts of religiously-motivated criminals acting alone. However, recent cases involving the assassination and attempted murder of abortion providers in both the U.S. and Canada have shown that perpetrators appear to be sheltered by a network of sympathizers.
religioustolerance.org/abo_viol.htm

Are there immigration laws that violate God’s law? Yes. Barring a person from earning a living for his family because of “quotas” definitely is a violation of God’s law.

Peace,
Meeshy

Can you prove that by Church doctrine or scripture? The links above regarding “Justice” and “rights” do not support your view. Does the illegal Mexican violate God’s law when he illegally takes a job away from a legal African immigrant? Does the illegal Columbian violate God’s law when they lie and use false ID to obtain a drivers liscense and work for less than a US citizen needs and is lawfully due?

 

[Ituyu]

I think maybe you misunderstood my post. I do not advocate such a incredulous position as the “some” I was referring to in my post.

You are of the “some” I was referring to in my tongue-in-cheek post. If not law or Justice- what is it REALLY about?

 

[Verisimilitude]

Well it’s already been discussed as to how this law does an"Injustice" to people who were denied the opportunity to qualify for jobs that needed to be filled and we’ve already discussed how this law did not work, according to the Rule of Law, to screen applicants, protect the American worker and to admit needed workers. One justification given for this anti-immigrant position is “Power”. So what else is it about? Or, is that it?

I have no power to gain or lose by enforcement of the law, and I am not anti-immigrant so your accusations are false.

Let’s not go off on another tangent. Nobody has ever said that ALL IMMIGRATION law, much less all US LAW is unjust.

Just the ones you disagree with.

I’m speaking specifically about failed law that helped create a shadow population within our borders that is vulnerable to exploitation.

Failed only becasue the political will was not there to enforce it by the Federal government specifically, and supported by greedy employers, and consumers. The shadow population exists only because of that.

A population that is needed and one that creates greater growth and wealth for this nation. Should they be punished for that?

Wealth built upon the back of illegal labor is not Just or desirable in my view. Growth is relative, and so is supply & demand which can be manipulated by the greedy and powerfull.

The law should have given us these workers “legally”. Was any good reason for denying these people entry to this country ever given? NO.

The law is the law, and to break it is criminal. Period. The Constitution has means to change the law if it is needed without coercion. Yes, there are good reasons. #1 they did not ask. #2 the current laws were trying to be fair to all immigrants around the world the equal chance to come here, and #3 (of many more justified reasons) US lawmakers established immigration levels of people and needs to sustain a healthy economy.

Were these people needed? YES.

Define “these people” because I think you are only concerned about the Mexican immigrants. And how do you know that these people were needed- by the mere fact they are here and the economy seems stable? I think we are in for a rude awakening. The displaced legal citizens/residents of New Orleans due to Katrina have been further devestated because of illegals. Generally residents rebuild themselves after disasters strike, but the governments actions purposely made it impractical for that to happen.

Is it in our best interest to deport them? NO. Is it possible to deport them all? NO.

It is in the nations interest for them to voluntarily leave. If “these people” are truly honest and law abiding they would do so.

Do we want to know who they are? YES.

Only as “these people” apply to re-enter legally.

Is it in our best interest that they be integrated and assimilated into our Social-Economic system? YES.

The best way is to abide by the law and meet the current requirements of citizenship.

Will current laws achieve the above? NO.

Yes, there is no problem with the laws. You seem to have a problem with the current legal limit of immigrants permitted by law, and excuse the breaking of that law to accomodate your personal view.

So, do we need a change in law to fix the problem? YES!

No.

Do YOU want that change in law ? NO. WHY?

Because the law is not the hindrence or the problem. If there is such a need for labor to be imported there are more appropriate, legal, and dignified ways to achieve that goal.

 

[Verisimilitude]

It appears to me that you just don’t want THEM here, no matter what.

Then you lack simple understanding.

Furthermore, remember that we did not deny entry to these people using any of the currently used criteria for admission. We simply said NO.

We said NOTHING. Did they ask? And if the current criteria was not used to deny them- why change the law? Enforce it.

It was an arbitrary decision with no rationale. We said, you’ll have to come here “illegally” but you can be deported if we so choose. It turns out, that it makes no sense to deport 12+ million people.

Nothing about the law is arbitrary, and you do not grasp the rational for the current limitations seemingly. Who told them to come here illegally? No, it is impractical to deport, and it is closer to 20+ million of “THEM”.

That left them and our economy only one way to fill those needed jobs. To some people that is JUST to other’s, NOT!

Wrong. The ends do not justify the means. It is not the only way.

One of the aims of Immigration Reform is to actually determine who among them qualifies and who does not, something that was denied them without justification.

It is “they” who have no justification. To say they did not break the law, but the law broke them is ignorant. If they followed the law that determinatiuon would have been done already as to who qualifies.

If the current Senate Bill gets adopted into law, one of it’s provisions is to FINALLY secure the border and stop the influx of human migration as it is now- as it was intended to do in the 1986 amnesty, and in the 21 years since that amnesty, another 20 million have arrived illegally. The border was not secured then or in the 20 years since.

What of the next 20 million that want to come here after and if this Bill gets into law? Will you then say no to THEM, or still think it is unfair becasue they are poor and we need the workers? If you are willing to break the current law to satisfy your world view, why should I think you will enforce the new law?

Secure the border first to stop the constant influx of people before any amnesty.
Require registration of those here now before any amnesty.
Deport any that do not register and/or have (other) criminal activities before any amnesty.

During that time of securing the border, registration, and criminal deportation a rational discussion can be had to determine:
1.) real employment needs
2.) if citizenship is warranted or desired by the immigrants and the US
3.) a shakeup to the economy by ferreting out cheating employers, illegal businesses, illegal activity
4.) giving real dignity to that shadow population by bringing them to the light of day
5.) apply real pressure on the governments these people come from to change rather than export their poor

Do that first, then we can talk, because all of that will take a few years and a different picture might emerge, and the American people have the right to know that this time the border is actually being secured so we do not face problem again in another 20 years.

 

[mary_bobo]

What do you think Immigration Reform is all about? The problem is that you’ll be very unhappy if and when it becomes a reality because it’s not REALLY about the law or Justice for you, is it?

Interesting that you judge when you do not know a darn thing about me. I will NOT be unhappy if they straighten this mess out. We thought we had done so when amnesty was granted in 1986. But border security was not provided as promised. I have no reason to believe that it will be different this time. Perhaps in a perfect world we could take in everyone who wants to come. But that is not reality much as you might think so. In this issue, why not use your head instead of your heart.

 

[meeshy]

How do you do that?
Like this:-?
Violent protests, in the form of arson, firebombing, and vandalism started in the early 1970’s in the U.S. Then, as now, most of the violence appears to be the acts of religiously-motivated criminals acting alone. However, recent cases involving the assassination and attempted murder of abortion providers in both the U.S. and Canada have shown that perpetrators appear to be sheltered by a network of sympathizers.
religioustolerance.org/abo_viol.htm

I said I would break civil law to end abortion. I would also break civil law to help illegal immigrants.

Peace,
Meeshy