Is it a sin to immigrate illegally?

[bobzills]

How can you imagine one would negate the other?

Our duty to our parents is based in the fourth commandment. Our duties to one another are based in commandments 5-10.

That the Church speaks so covincingly of our need to serve the poor should in no way alter your duty to your parents.

Well which is preferred?
The ten commandments indicate that honor to one’s father and mother is preferred. So your preferential option is a really an attempt to promote some sort of political agenda.

 

[bobzills]

And some of their children are already home. What then? Are you willing to violate the civil rights of American citizens by discriminating on the basis of national origin of their parents?

How is this just?

What kind of help are you offering to those already there?

No I am very much against violating the rights of American citizens. However, an illegal alien is not an American citizen. And that’s what I was talking about. If they do not have a legal right to be here, I am in favor of helping them go back home and helping them in their homeland.

 

[verdigirl]

No I am very much against violating the rights of American citizens. However, an illegal alien is not an American citizen. And that’s what I was talking about. If they do not have a legal right to be here, I am in favor of helping them go back home and helping them in their homeland.

Don’t pretend that you don’t know that some undocumented immigrants have children that were born here.

Let’s not dance around the maypole here. Are you willing to violate the rights of those American citizens that were born here, but whose parents are undocumented?

 

[catharina]

No I am very much against violating the rights of American citizens. However, an illegal alien is not an American citizen. And that’s what I was talking about. If they do not have a legal right to be here, I am in favor of helping them go back home and helping them in their homeland.

The convenience and comfort of American living seems to “allow” some RCs an exemption (in their own minds) that says they are free to violate/ignore clear teachings of the Church - whether the teachings come from Rome or from our bishops. Example: imagining that Church teaching would ever have one abandon one’s parents to give an option to the love and care of the poor. Such thinking doesn’t fly; the “logic” is strangled and false.

 

[bobzills]

The convenience and comfort of American living seems to “allow” some RCs an exemption (in their own minds) that says they are free to violate/ignore clear teachings of the Church - whether the teachings come from Rome or from our bishops. Example: imagining that Church teaching would ever have one abandon one’s parents to give an option to the love and care of the poor. Such thinking doesn’t fly; the “logic” is strangled and false.

The ten commandments mention the obligation to honor one’s father and mother. They do not specitically say anything like:
Thou shalt not erect borders around thy country.
Thou shalt have a preferential option for no good criminals over thy brother and thy sister and thy father and thy mother.
These are heretical additions to the original ten commandments.

 

[catharina]

Well which is preferred?
The ten commandments indicate that honor to one’s father and mother is preferred. So your preferential option is a really an attempt to promote some sort of political agenda.

Sadly (maybe) I’m apolitical but then so was Mother Teresa - and she was criticized for that fact. My field of study has always been Theology. (For real.)

Shall I remind you that Jesus Christ the Lord was judged and condemned and crucified as a “common, terrible criminal.” Your lack of logic in matters of the faith is appalling.

God is a God of order, not chaos. Systems that promote and defend great inequities are un-Christian - even if excuses given are related to one’s being a “good son.”

 

[catharina]

The ten commandments mention the obligation to honor one’s father and mother. They do not specitically say anything like:
Thou shalt not erect borders around thy country.
Thou shalt have a preferential option for no good criminals over thy brother and thy sister and thy father and thy mother.
These are heretical additions to the original ten commandments.

Then you have just called Pope John Paul II a heretic. Again, I remind you that in His time and place, Jesus Christ was judged a “no good criminal.”

Naturally and supernaturally, I prefer the teachings and practices of John Paul II to yours. As I should.

 

[fnr]

Oh, really? Is that so? So according to you, I must have a preferential option for a low character no-good criminal because he is financially poor over my mother and father or else I will go to hell?

I’m not arguing for criminality. Poverty is one thing, criminality is another. To fundamentally define illegal immigrants as criminals and “no good” is to categorize a whole class of predominantly poor people as unworthwhile. We have a responsibility to look beyond simple legalistic reductionism to the dignity within every human.

The “preferential option for the poor” is NOT according to me. According to the current pope, the last pope, and most every theologian I’ve heard, Christ’s ministry on earth was among the poor, the downtrodden, and those that the Jewish-Roman tetrachies legally considered “no good.” It’s not just simple platitudes that Christ said, “the meek shall inherit the earth,” and “blessed are the poor, for the kingdom shall be theirs,” and that the contributions of one poor woman to the treasury from her need was worth all the contributions of the weathly from their surplus.

 

[catharina]

“Blessed are the poor in spirit for they shall inherit the kingdom of heaven” invites us to join the poor, in spirit at least, in their true and constant struggle to feed clothe and shelter themselves and their children. In serving them, we serve Christ the Lord

 

[Trader]

And some of their children are already home. What then? Are you willing to violate the civil rights of American citizens by discriminating on the basis of national origin of their parents?

How is this just?

What kind of help are you offering to those already there?

Obviously the problem of the “anchor child” is a problem. I would like to clarify your positions with a hypothetical:

Juan and his pregnant wife illegally enter the country and work at a meat packing plant in Nebraska. Their child is born here.

Jose and his wife and ten year old son enter the country illegally and work at the same plant.

Pepe is married with a two year old child. He deserts his family and enters the country illegally with his new girlfriend and obtains employment at the same plant.

INS raids the plant and takes them all into custody. All six adults violated the same law. Should they be punished equally for the same illegal act, or should they be punished according to the different legal statuses of their children?

 

[verdigirl]

Obviously the problem of the “anchor child” is a problem. I would like to clarify your positions with a hypothetical:

Juan and his pregnant wife illegally enter the country and work at a meat packing plant in Nebraska. Their child is born here.

Jose and his wife and ten year old son enter the country illegally and work at the same plant.

Pepe is married with a two year old child. He deserts his family and enters the country illegally with his new girlfriend and obtains employment at the same plant.

INS raids the plant and takes them all into custody. All six adults violated the same law. Should they be punished equally for the same illegal act, or should they be punished according to the different legal statuses of their children?

The Bishops propose that the 12 million undocumented workers that are here illegally, under certain conditions, should be allowed an attainable path to legalization, whether that be only a work permit, permanent residency or ultimately citizenship. They propose some sort of fine, language test, etc. and THEN for them to go to the BACK of the legal status application line.

Check it out yourself: justiceforimmigrants.org

 

[Al_Masetti]

Mexico is one of the wealthiest countries on Earth. They have lots and lots of oil.

So, where does all that money go? Why are people LEAVING Mexico instead of migrating TO Mexico?

Alaska has tons of oil (and would have more if not for people in the Lower 48 outlawing drilling in Alaska) AND the government of Alaska GIVES residents of Alaska free money.

Why would anyone want to leave Mexico, which is a workers’ paradise.

If there are some “problems” within Mexico, then why don’t “they” fix those problems.

I mean, like, Mexico does not have a really large populations and 10% of Mexican people are in the United States of America. Why is that?

Should Mexico, being an oil producing nation, reform its immigration laws to be equal to the actual or de facto U.S. immigration laws?

 

[Trader]

The Bishops propose that the 12 million undocumented workers that are here illegally, under certain conditions, should be allowed an attainable path to legalization, whether that be only a work permit, permanent residency or ultimately citizenship. They propose some sort of fine, language test, etc. and THEN for them to go to the BACK of the legal status application line.

Check it out yourself: justiceforimmigrants.org

“under certain conditions”
“attainable path”
“some sort of fine”
“language test, etc”
“BACK of the legal status application line”

Is it any wonder it is difficult to find enough agreement to get a comprehensive bill? Even the shiftiest politicians are not this vague. How can you possiblly tell us you know what the bishops saying? We know individual interpretation of Scripture is a problem. Individual interpretation of non-infallible teaching is even more prone to error.

For people who obey our immigration laws the back of the line starts in their home country. Do you think 12 million people are going to leave for even a short time to apply legally in their home country? And what do we do about illegal immigrants who have committed additional crimes while here? For many of them to come forward would be to admit violations of fraud, forgery, and tax statutes.

What do you do about the precedent this sets? If enough people break the law, we will change the law to pretend you didn’t really break the law. The last time amnesty was granted it spurred a huge amount of additional illegal immigration.

 

[verdigirl]

Mexico is one of the wealthiest countries on Earth. They have lots and lots of oil.

So, where does all that money go? Why are people LEAVING Mexico instead of migrating TO Mexico?

Alaska has tons of oil (and would have more if not for people in the Lower 48 outlawing drilling in Alaska) AND the government of Alaska GIVES residents of Alaska free money.

Why would anyone want to leave Mexico, which is a workers’ paradise.

If there are some “problems” within Mexico, then why don’t “they” fix those problems.

I mean, like, Mexico does not have a really large populations and 10% of Mexican people are in the United States of America. Why is that?

Should Mexico, being an oil producing nation, reform its immigration laws to be equal to the actual or de facto U.S. immigration laws?

Well, last time I checked, the Government of Alaska is actually that same as yours and mine. I have heard that it’s pretty lucrative to work in Alaska.

There are serious economic problems in Mexico that need to be fixed. You are right, they are one of the richest countries in Latin America. And they need to start taking care of their own, instead of letting the top 1% have 90% of the wealth. They probably need to be looking at their tax code for starters. I don’t know enough about that, to be honest.

I do know, however, that even just the native-born poor in this country have the same problems as those in Mexico. So we’re not exactly an economic Eden here either.

And as a complement to attainable legal status here, we should also be tightening the borders, cross-checking criminal records, etc…using the computer systems that we have to make the job easier at the border. If someone is a convicted drug smuggler, they shouldn’t come in, and we need to give our border people the right tools to do that.

Additionally, we need to get stricter with companies who knowingly hire undocumented workers just to get around their tax responsibilities.

On top of that, minimum wage needs to be raised, and health care made available to all, so that our own workers are attracted to those jobs in the fields and poultry processing plants. This is what happened after the unions collapsed. They were responsible for ensuring that workers were well compensated and had fair and safe working conditions (and also responsible for a fair amount of corruption, I admit).

Did you know Cesar Chavez was bitterly opposed to undocumented workers? He would call them scabs. His primary focus was to organize the American farmworkers so that they had safe and fair working conditions. And he would march with the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe at the front!

But we don’t like unions in this country, because they tell business what to do. Well, here’s the result. They purposely recruit and hire undocumented workers to take the jobs that Americans won’t because they don’t pay enough to feed a family here. This is what we get.

So there’s a lot of groundwork we have to do here, without even worrying about the 12 million undocumented people and the “anchor babies.”

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Mexico is one of the wealthiest countries on Earth. They have lots and lots of oil.

So, where does all that money go? Why are people LEAVING Mexico instead of migrating TO Mexico?

Alaska has tons of oil (and would have more if not for people in the Lower 48 outlawing drilling in Alaska) AND the government of Alaska GIVES residents of Alaska free money.

Why would anyone want to leave Mexico, which is a workers’ paradise.

If there are some “problems” within Mexico, then why don’t “they” fix those problems.

I mean, like, Mexico does not have a really large populations and 10% of Mexican people are in the United States of America. Why is that?

Should Mexico, being an oil producing nation, reform its immigration laws to be equal to the actual or de facto U.S. immigration laws?

Actually, what’s going on in Mexico is a result of its de facto pure capitalism. Unregulated capitalism ultimately leads to a very small cadre of extremely wealthy and a large mass of extremely poor and no real middle class.

The United States has a regulated capitalist economy which, generally, protects working people from abusive corporations. That’s going away under the current administration, thus the logical result is happening…the rich/poor gap is widening into a chasm and the middle class is disappearing.

Mexico does have some regulations but the corporations and those who do have money can buy off the poorly paid civil servants charged with enforcing the regulations. We don’t have that here because there are enough checks and balances and the civil servants are paid enough that it’s not worth the risk to take a bribe, with some exceptions, of course.

What does Mexico need? Honestly? I think a Mexican version of the New Deal would do that country a great deal of good.

 

[verdigirl]

“under certain conditions”
“attainable path”
“some sort of fine”
“language test, etc”
“BACK of the legal status application line”

Is it any wonder it is difficult to find enough agreement to get a comprehensive bill? Even the shiftiest politicians are not this vague. How can you possiblly tell us you know what the bishops saying? We know individual interpretation of Scripture is a problem. Individual interpretation of non-infallible teaching is even more prone to error.

For people who obey our immigration laws the back of the line starts in their home country. Do you think 12 million people are going to leave for even a short time to apply legally in their home country? And what do we do about illegal immigrants who have committed additional crimes while here? For many of them to come forward would be to admit violations of fraud, forgery, and tax statutes.

What do you do about the precedent this sets? If enough people break the law, we will change the law to pretend you didn’t really break the law. The last time amnesty was granted it spurred a huge amount of additional illegal immigration.

I appreciate that you took the time to read, even if it was just to give you ammunition.

No, if I have children here in the U.S., I’m not going to want to leave to go to the back of the line. But maybe the back of the line could also mean that you have to prove that you have been here, crime free, for at least 5 years and that you pay a fine in order to receive a temporary work permit and pay taxes just like everyone else. To me, that sounds reasonable.

Believe it or not, my first order of priority is to restore jobs to American workers…but without sacrificing the family lives of people who have been working here. If anyone should be drawn and quartered, it should be big business like Tyson or Swifts or other places like that. Those companies are taking money out of YOUR social security check by circumventing the laws.

On top of it, they’re abusing workers to do that.

Did you know about the case in which a Walmart store hired a janitorial contractor to clean floors after hours, but refused to pay overtime? Legend also has it that in one case, instead of paying the contractors, they locked them in the store and called immigration, just to get out of the cleaning bill and preserve the store overhead. Read it for yourselves: wakeupwalmart.com/facts/#immigrants

Walmart is already notorious for their ridiculously low salaries and cost-prohibitive health insurance. Keep reading that site…it will show data that clearly states that where there is a Walmart, the strain on public services go up. I will NEVER set one foot in a Walmart!

Brothers and sisters, that ain’t justice.

 

[verdigirl]

Actually, what’s going on in Mexico is a result of its de facto pure capitalism. Unregulated capitalism ultimately leads to a very small cadre of extremely wealthy and a large mass of extremely poor and no real middle class.

The United States has a regulated capitalist economy which, generally, protects working people from abusive corporations. That’s going away under the current administration, thus the logical result is happening…the rich/poor gap is widening into a chasm and the middle class is disappearing.

Mexico does have some regulations but the corporations and those who do have money can buy off the poorly paid civil servants charged with enforcing the regulations. We don’t have that here because there are enough checks and balances and the civil servants are paid enough that it’s not worth the risk to take a bribe, with some exceptions, of course.

What does Mexico need? Honestly? I think a Mexican version of the New Deal would do that country a great deal of good.

Excellent assessment. Amen!

 

[Al_Masetti]

If it’s a sin to immigrate illegally, do people who immigrate LEGALLY get extra grace? Or are they foolish for obeying the law?

If there are 12 million illegal immigrants in the USA, how many people are there who want to LEGALLY immigrate to the USA?

In view of the huge bureaucratic delays experienced by LEGAL immigrants, in addition to medical exams, criminal background checks, then is the citizenry of the USA committing a sin by delaying their entry?

Should all those people who WANT TO OBEY THE LAW be given preferential treatiment for immigration purposes?

We’re got people patiently waiting in line for years to come here legally. What should we do about them?

 

[bobzills]

We’re got people patiently waiting in line for years to come here legally. What should we do about them?

Obviously, the people waiting in line should be given preferential treatment over criminals who are violating the immigration laws of the country. I don’t get it where people here are reversing the time honored teaching of Catholic principles and saying that Catholicism demands that we give preferential treatment to criminal illegal immigrants. The fact is that according to Catholic teaching, as it has been taught using the Baltimore Catechism, Catholics must respect and obey the lawful authority of our country because it comes from God. This is according to the Commandment: Honor thy father and thy mother, which includes the command to obey the laws of the country. If immigration criminals are disobeying the laws of a country, the people have every right to punish these immigration criminals according to the laws in effect.

 

[thedavidwilson]

I wish you well in your discernment.

I’ll guess that along the way someone who is advising you in that process might be able to enlighten you to the difference between laws of God and laws of man, between just laws and unjust laws. Even our national government recognizes the right of civil disobedience in regard to unjust laws. That human right supercedes unjust law.

A country’s right to secure is border is a right of natural law as well. Perhaps is it is Mexico and other countries are the ones who are break natural laws by not allowing thier people to earn a living wage. The US is the most generous nation when it comes to LEGAL immigration. We admit about a million legal citizens yeach year about another million temporary workers (green cards). This is far more than other countries. If this is too low an amount then the law should be changed not broken.