Is it a sin to immigrate illegally?

[sprout]

I was replaced at my job a few years ago by two illegals. The boss told me that he could pay me $10/hr plus benefits for a 40 hour week or, pay two mexicans(**didn’t care if illegal or not **as there are more where they came from) at $6 per hour with no benefits. This leads to the question, setting aside the owner’s responsibility, about the worker’s sin here. They knowenly took my job.

First, I think your outrage should be towards your employer. I think you should have reported him to the authorities. We do have hiring/firing laws in this country and employers who fail to abide by these laws can face severe penalties.

Second, I do not agree that just because the Mexicans (illegal or not) who are willing to work for $6.00/hr with no benefits are culpable for “stealing” your job. An employer does not “owe” you a job. Whenever you accept work you are taking a position from all the others who’ve applied. When I accepted employment there were dozens of others competing for my job, so am I “stealing” or taking those dozens of others’ jobs because my employer decided to hire me instead of them?

Although you do show in your testimony that it is not always the case that undocumented workers only do jobs that US Citizens aren’t willing to do, it does show the extent of the greed of US employers and how much their greed is hurting the innocent.

Not paying a fair wage is also one of the sins that cry out to God for vengeance.

God help us all!

 

[sprout]

Which has been my point to those who think it’s ok for workers to come to the US ILLEGALLY…it harms our economy, and it perpetuates the causes of suffering in their home country…they just don’t get it.

I can’t understand why people “just don’t get” that the SIN here is greed on the part of employers, the Nation (NAFTA/CAFTA), the World Bank and even common folk who want to save a few $$ and would hire an “undocumented worker” to do their lawn or paint their house.

Why blame your neighbor, who only wants the same things you want, to feed & shelter his family? Doesn’t jibe with the Great Commandment to love our neighbor as ourselves IMO.

 

[Yerusalyim]

Sprout,

You keep talking as if we are mad at Illegal Immigrants, and for the most part that is NOT true, we are mad at the employers who hire them. I think most of us here understand that these people are just looking for a better life, however, by coming here illegally and working for substandard wages and sending money back to their home country…they, and those of you who support them, perpetuate the very evils that cause them to want to come to the US. The problem is not the US, it’s the Mexican government, full of corruption and greed.

You said,

We do have hiring/firing laws in this country and employers who fail to abide by these laws can face severe penalties.

So, then you propose that these laws should be enforced? SO DO I, because if they were, no illegals would be hired. Next question, if WE should follow these laws, why shouldn’t the illegal immigrants be expected to follow the law and NOT COME HERE ILLEGALLY?

 

[KathleenElsie]

I can’t understand why people “just don’t get” that the SIN here is greed on the part of employers, the Nation (NAFTA/CAFTA), the World Bank and even common folk who want to save a few $$ and would hire an “undocumented worker” to do their lawn or paint their house.

Why blame your neighbor, who only wants the same things you want, to feed & shelter his family? Doesn’t jibe with the Great Commandment to love our neighbor as ourselves IMO.

I get the issue of greed quite clearly. But it is the OLD CHICKEN AND EGG issue. Did the work or the worker come first in this case?

The great Commandment says to “love your neighbor as yourself” and I do. It does not say to GIVE YOUR NEIGHBOR ALL YOUR GOODS. WE ALL NEED TO LOVE OUR FAMILIES AND THAT INCLUDES BEING ABLE TO SUPPORT THEM IN A DIGNIFIED WAY. Those of us that are citizens should be able to work without fear of being LET GO because a non-citizen will work for lower wages in my job. To be fair the non-citizen should be paid the same “fair” wage that the citizen gets period.

 

[Yerusalyim]

Sprout,

This is a quite serious question, and goes to the heart of the issue. Do the people of the United States have the right to know who is coming into our country or not?

It seems to me your issue is with greed, well, go to the other side of the border where a governments greed and corruption make it impossible for a real middle class to get started.

You have a nice house, your kids are well fed and well clothed, you have cable, internet, all the amenities. Your neighbor is a poor money manager, spends their money on booze, drugs, loose women.

You’re charitable, you give food, clothes and money to some of the younger kids from the neighbor. One day you come home, and the neighbor kids are in your house taking food, taking money out of your kids piggy bank, out of your desk drawer…is that OK with you? Because of YOUR GREED, you have more than your neighbor and he’s sending his kids over to take food, money, and clothes from your house…they’re even taking food back to mom and dad…all without asking you. Is that ok? It’s the same type of thing, you’re not mad at the kids, but you don’t want them in your house without you giving them permission…right? You blame the parents who squander money and then send their kids over to your house to get yours.

 

[sprout]

You have a nice house, your kids are well fed and well clothed, you have cable, internet, all the amenities. Your neighbor is a poor money manager, spends their money on booze, drugs, loose women.

You’re charitable, you give food, clothes and money to some of the younger kids from the neighbor. One day you come home, and the neighbor kids are in your house taking food, taking money out of your kids piggy bank, out of your desk drawer…is that OK with you? Because of YOUR GREED, you have more than your neighbor and he’s sending his kids over to take food, money, and clothes from your house…they’re even taking food back to mom and dad…all without asking you. Is that ok? It’s the same type of thing, you’re not mad at the kids, but you don’t want them in your house without you giving them permission…right? You blame the parents who squander money and then send their kids over to your house to get yours.

Actually, the analogy is more like you’re filthy stinking rich, in fact you’re the richest person in your neighborhood (the US is the richest nation in the Americas), you’re neighbor is poor, very, very poor (Mexico and Central America are 3rd world countries) but quite content to live off the land as farmers. He does have a nice little piece of land that has some natural resources your greed just can’t keep it’s grubby little hands off of. You decide you’re gonna loan him lots and lots of money just to ‘help him out’ in developing some of those “resources” all the while you know he has no way to repay. Years later when he can’t repay the loan you then you put him on a budget that even further reduces his ability to care for and feed his children to the point they are mostly starving, have no potent water to drink. At the same time you also make sure that any profits realized off your “investment” in developing your neighbors resources and the budget (a.k.a. Structural Adjustments) are all funneled back into your own bank account. Then complain loudly that his children *who are starving *are going around the neighborhood asking for work so they can eat. Of course, you refuse to forgive the loan that you made in bad faith to begin with:

Matthew 18

Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened to a king, who would take an account of his servants. 24 And when he had begun to take the account, one was brought to him, that owed him ten thousand talents. 25 And as he had not wherewith to pay it, his lord commanded that he should be sold, and his wife and children and all that he had, and payment to be made.

26 But that servant falling down, besought him, saying: Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. 27 And the lord of that servant being moved with pity, let him go and forgave him the debt. 28 But when that servant was gone out, he found one of his fellow servants that owed him an hundred pence: and laying hold of him, throttled him, saying: Pay what thou owest. 29 And his fellow servant falling down, besought him, saying: Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. 30 And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he paid the debt.

31 Now his fellow servants seeing what was done, were very much grieved, and they came and told their lord all that was done. 32 Then his lord called him; and said to him: Thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all the debt, because thou besoughtest me: 33 Shouldst not thou then have had compassion also on thy fellow servant, even as I had compassion on thee? 34 And his lord being angry, delivered him to the torturers until he paid all the debt. 35 So also shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

 

[sprout]

So, then you propose that these laws should be enforced? SO DO I, because if they were, no illegals would be hired. Next question, if WE should follow these laws, why shouldn’t the illegal immigrants be expected to follow the law and NOT COME HERE ILLEGALLY?

this is why, as I’ve said repeatedly, I support more “legal” pathways for these “unskilled workers” to come here to work.

If my neighbors children are starving then I would give them food. If my neighbor is naked I would clothe him…" I am commanded to as much if I am to call myself a Christian. ref Matthew 25:14-18

If my poor neighbor’s children knock on my door and ask if they can mow my lawn then I would hire them.

In fact, I admire the fellow in this story I received in an email entitle “A Red Marble” author unknown:

During the waning years of the Great Depression of the 1930’s in a small southeastern Kansas community, I used to stop by Mr.Miller’s roadside stand for farm fresh produce as the season made it available. Food and money were still extremely scarce and bartering was used extensively.

One particular day, Mr. Miller was bagging some early potatoes for me. I noticed a small boy, delicate of bone and feature, ragged but clean, hungrily apprising a basket of freshly picked green peas. I paid for my potatoes but was also drawn to the display of fresh green peas. I am a pushover for creamed peas and new potatoes. Pondering the peas, I couldn’t help overhearing the conversation between Mr. Miller and the ragged boy next to me.

“Hello Barry, how are you today?”

“H’lo, Mr. Miller. Fine, thank ya. Jus’ admirin’ them peas…sure look good.”

“They are good, Barry. How’s your Ma?”

“Fine. Gittin’ stronger alla’ time.”

“Good. Anything I can help you with?”

“No, Sir. Jus’ admirin’ them peas.”

“Would you like to take some home?”

“No, Sir. Got nuthin’ to pay for 'em with.”

“Well, what have you to trade me for some of those peas?”

“All I got’s my prize marble here.”

“Is that right? Let me see it.”

“Here 'tis. She’s a dandy.”

“I can see that. Hmmmm, only thing is this one is blue and I sort of go for red. Do you have a red one like this at home?”

“Not 'zackley …but, almost.”

“Tell you what. Take this sack of peas home with you and next trip this way let me look at that red marble.”

“Sure will. Thanks, Mr. Miller.”

Mrs. Miller, who had been standing nearby, came over to help me. With a smile she said, “There are two other boys like him in our community, all three are in very poor circumstances. Jim just loves to bargain with them for peas, apples, tomatoes or whatever. When they come back with their red marbles, and they always do, he decides he doesn’t like red after all and he sends them home with a bag of produce for a green marble or an orange one, perhaps.”

I left the stand, smiling to myself, impressed with this man. A short time later I moved to Colorado but I never forgot the story of this man, the boys and their bartering. Several years went by, each more rapid than the previous one. Just recently I had occasion to visit some old friends in that Idaho community and while I was there learned that Mr. Miller had died.

They were having his viewing that evening and knowing my friends wanted to go, I agreed to accompany them. Upon our arrival at the mortuary, we fell into line to meet the relatives of the deceased and to offer whatever words of comfort we could. Ahead of us in line were three young men. One was in an army uniform and the other two wore nice haircuts, dark suits and white shirts - very professional looking. They approached Mrs. Miller, standing smiling and composed, by her husband’s casket. Each of the young men hugged her, kissed her on the cheek, spoke briefly with her and moved on to the casket. Her misty light blue eyes followed them as, one by one, each young man stopped briefly and placed his own warm hand over the cold pale hand in the casket. Each left the mortuary, awkwardly, wiping his eyes.

Our turn came to meet Mrs. Miller. I told her who I was and mentioned the story she had told me about the marbles. Eyes glistening, she took my hand and led me to the casket. "Those three young men who just left were the boys I told you about. They just told me how they appreciated the things Jim ‘traded’ them. Now, at last when Jim could not change his mind about color or size - they came to pay their debt. "

“We’ve never had a great deal of the wealth of this world,” she confided, “but right now, Jim would consider himself the richest man in Idaho.” With loving gentleness, she lifted her husband’s lifeless fingers. Resting underneath were three exquisitely shined, red marbles!

 

[joab]

Second, I do not agree that just because the Mexicans (illegal or not) who are willing to work for $6.00/hr with no benefits are culpable for “stealing” your job. An employer does not “owe” you a job. Whenever you accept work you are taking a position from all the others who’ve applied. When I accepted employment there were dozens of others competing for my job, so am I “stealing” or taking those dozens of others’ jobs because my employer decided to hire me instead of them?

You have 2 things wrong with the above. You are assuming that the “illegal” is poor. Visit the actual towns that these illegals come from in Mexico. While Mexico as a whole maybe poor, these towns are very well-off. The amount of money these workers are sending back is enormous. These people are keeping their whole families back while they work to send back. I have personally visited these places in Mexico. They have a lot nicer living then I will probably ever have.

The other assumption is that I would be “stealing” a job from others if granted employment. Not so, if I am competing with others who have to pay taxes, health care for my family, car insurance, schooling, housing, and follow the laws here. I think that , by them coming here, sending the money home and not paying but taking from the US, forcing me to subsidize them: that is a sin. I am now the newest “poor” who has to subsidize the “poor” immigrant.

I do have sympathy for the immigrant who is fleeing to be here due to hunger, political oppression, etc. I do not have sympathy for the immigrants who are here to get rich and move back. Being on the front of jobs that “no american will do”, I see more of the latter than former. How is it, that most of the immigrants that I am in direct competition for jobs, are young adults? I am not seeing the older immigrants fighting to work as a nursing assistant. I am not seeing the 16-20 year old immigrants going to school to become nursing assistants. My answer lies in the young adults are here to make money and take it back to Mexico to better the lives of their families. Once again, it is like heading up to Canada/Alaska for the fishing season…hard work, but you can bring the money home and not work the rest of the year.Never mind the native that needs the season just to support his family.

Taking the job from a native so that I can live “better” is not right. I know that I am living “poor” but walking over my neighbor’s right to live, so that I am no longer “poor” is a sin.

 

[pieta05]

YES. It is illegal and it is a sin. If that were not the case, DH and I would have saved thousands of dollars, time and worry and frustration, and just had him come here illegally from England. We were even offered a way by an immigration attorney to “get around the system” by doing just that and “fixing” things once he got here. I was completely disgusted at the mere suggesting.

Yes - it is absolutely illegal. If we can do it the right way, so can others.

In the instance of persecution or other evils, there are ways to seek assylum LEGALLY. No excuses.


~Liza

 

[urban-hermit]

Originally Posted by urban-hermit

Dear Sprout,

I know what kind of jobs they have simply by direct experience: being acquainted with people on a face-to-face basis and listening to what they say regarding this issue.

When asked some short variant of the question “Do you support yourself and your family in a job where you might experience competition, depressed wages, downgraded working conditions, or job loss as a result of the presence of illegal aliens in your area willing and able to do the same work you do?”, their response is usually “no”.

So when I said “I find that …” I meant that this has been my experience in the people I know first-hand.

And it makes sense from a human nature point of view: if I am not personally threatened by an injustice, it is easier to allow it to continue unabated, because it does not seem like an urgent problem.

I do commend you on the use of the word “alien” as that is a term much preferable to “illegal” and the term used in the Bible.

I like the term “alien” because in this case it is more accurate than the term “immigrant”, which means somebody who has adopted a new home country. Many “illegal immigrants” are not actually immigrants at all in fact because they are only here for a few years to gather up some cash and then return to their home country to live a higher life than before, and so these people would be more precisely referred to as illegal aliens.

The only ones “giving away” these jobs are the employers who offer these jobs and our gov’t that allows it.

Sorry, it’s too easy to just blame the government like that, as if we who vote have no role in it. The “gov’t that allows it” can only continue to do so if their constituents support them in looking the other way. This is why politicians were unable to put through an amnesty bill for “illegal immigrants” - citizens like myself spoke up and demanded enforcement of current and valid immigration laws, however imperfect they may be as all human laws in this world are.

In case you missed it here are some citations regarding “unskilled labor” statistics and US Citizens’ willingness to fill those jobs

“US Citizens’ willingness to fill those jobs” is a function of how much the jobs pay, which is a function of the willingness of the labor pool to work harder for what, by US standards, is not much money, but by Mexican standards is quite a livable wage. I’m no Harvard economist, but does this not make sense?

I see the point you (and the US Bishops) are trying to make: the number of unskilled visas does not match the number of projected unskilled jobs. But do you and the Bishops believe the framers of this law were just bad at math? - Did they perhaps have some purpose in mind? - perhaps to give uneducated US citizens preference for these jobs? - or perhaps it is designed to encourage employers to poney up and offer a living wage so that the jobs would be filled by US citizens BEFORE the Mexican floodgates would have to be opened?

It makes more sense to me to enforce CURRENT immigration laws FIRST, gauge the actual shortfall (if any) of workers SECOND, place safeguards in place to help ensure fair treatment of all workers THIRD, and only THEN to allow unlimited droves of aliens into the country to work all the unskilled jobs left over.

 

[urban-hermit]

So it is my position that by ordering, advising, praising, approving of, not disclosing or not hindering our governments when they attempt to:

• exploit the foreigners who live in your land.
• or fail to treat them " like everyone else, and you must love them as you love yourself. "
• molest or oppress a foreigner

then one is guilty of cooperating in these sins that “cry out to heaven for vengeance”

I actually agree with you, EXCEPT that it is not our government who is doing the 3 things you listed above - it is the employers and illegal aliens (both of them) who are circumventing the law - THAT is what is causing the so-called exploitation and oppression. I say “so-called” because by the standards of their country, even minimum wage is decent money for them and their families. And also they usually come all the way here to get it on their own - it’s not like we captured them and brought them here forcibly.

I think you are overstating the “sins that cry out to heaven” scenario. But even if you are not, the culprit is most often those who disobey the law, more than the laws themselves.

I understand you feel that the World Bank or NAFTA is causing poverty in Mexico. I’m not versed enough on the issue to say, but I would venture the opinion that those people were poor before NAFTA and the World Bank came on the scene. Be that as it may, we Americans do care about the poor in other countries, as evidenced by the amounts of money we contribute to Catholic Relief Services and such. But there is only so much we can do to fix the problems of Mexico. Some of it they have to do.

That’s not a function of us not caring, or failing in love for our neighbor. It’s a function that there’s only so much we can possibly do without intervening in Mexico’s sovereignty over their own goofed-up system.

 

[sprout]

QUOTE=joab;2667944You have 2 things wrong with the above. You are assuming that the “illegal” is poor. Visit the actual towns that these illegals come from in Mexico. While Mexico as a whole maybe poor, these towns are very well-off. The amount of money these workers are sending back is enormous. These people are keeping their whole families back while they work to send back. I have personally visited these places in Mexico. They have a lot nicer living then I will probably ever have.

No doubt, the US $$ value to the peso would allow someone who earns $6 US $$ to provide well for their family in Mexico, Central America and parts of South America. This does not in any way mean that they would even be able to feed, shelter, or clothe their family if they had to depend on finding work in their Country.

I refer again to the NAFTA/CAFTA/IMF/SA article. Without an understanding of the complicity of the US in bringing about the 1.5 million displaced workers in Mexico I would agree with you. Given that our Nation’s foreign policy has directly contributed to the loss of jobs, and resulting poverty then I do think it’s wrong for us to deny them the only means to provide for themselves.

The other assumption is that I would be “stealing” a job from others if granted employment. Not so, if I am competing with others who have to pay taxes, health care for my family, car insurance, schooling, housing, and follow the laws here. I think that , by them coming here, sending the money home and not paying but taking from the US, forcing me to subsidize them: that is a sin. I am now the newest “poor” who has to subsidize the “poor” immigrant.

You are competing with people all over the world for your job, regardless of whether they live here, pay takes, health care, etc. Employers do now “owe” you a job, it is completely at their discretion who they choose to hire. If they want to put their livelihoods on the line and hire undocumented workers then that’s their choice and they are the ones to face the penalties. Many US Companies have “globalized” to find cheaper labor. Hewlett Packard, Microsoft, etc. have moved their operations oversees.

btw: I have been directly affected by this. I was laid off due to lack of work and was unemployed for almost a year because my industry is sending most of it’s jobs oversees to Asia. I eventually found a job in my industry by taking a $5.00/hr cut in pay and am now consider “working poor” and grateful to have a job.

How is it, that most of the immigrants that I am in direct competition for jobs, are young adults? I am not seeing the older immigrants fighting to work as a nursing assistant. I am not seeing the 16-20 year old immigrants going to school to become nursing assistants. My answer lies in the young adults are here to make money and take it back to Mexico to better the lives of their families.

It’s because they are “unskilled laborers” see the article I posted earlier. Skilled laborers have 15X the number of available worker visas. The largest labor sector of “unskilled laborers” is mexico and central america. Most US Citizens do not fall into this category, as most US Citizens are educated and skilled.

 

[Ender]

I refer again to the NAFTA/CAFTA/IMF/SA article. Without an understanding of the complicity of the US in bringing about the 1.5 million displaced workers in Mexico I would agree with you. Given that our Nation’s foreign policy has directly contributed to the loss of jobs, and resulting poverty then I do think it’s wrong for us to deny them the only means to provide for themselves.

I would disagree with your conclusion even if you had quoted someone who’s opinion on the economic affects of NAFTA et al should be taken seriously. Here’s just one of many examples of serious economists (this one is an economist with the Federal Reserve Bank in St. Louis) who come to a very different conclusion about the affect of NAFTA.

stlouisfed.org/news/releases/2003/03_04_03-b.html

Ender

 

[sprout]

Ender,

I take it you don’t think ***formerly pro-NAFTA ***development economist Professor Riordan Roett of Johns Hopkins’ School of Advanced International Studies opinion should be taken seriously?

In case you didn’t know Riordan Roett is the Sarita and Don Johnston Professor and Director of the Western Hemisphere Program, The Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.

I already know you discount the opinions of the Bishops, Papal Commissions, and even Our Holy Father Pope Benedict, so I find it as no surprise that you would discount the opinions of noted economists, but do you also discount the opinions of the U.S. International Trade Commission Study, and the U.S. Agency for International Development Study?

A 2004 U.S. International Trade Commission study on the potential impacts of CAFTA leads one to conclude that the agreement will displace many in the rural sector in Central America. Following a recent visit to Guatemala, United Nations Special Raporteur for Food Jean Ziegler determined that **CAFTA will increase hunger and poverty **once the agreement fully kicks in. A U.S. Agency for International Development study on the maquila sector in the Dominican Republic anticipates a **25 percent decrease in employment **in this industry even under CAFTA, as the Multi-Fiber Agreement concludes. Thus, one is left to wonder where the displaced rural population of Central America will find employment.

{snip}

The most obvious failure of neoliberal reforms in Latin America over the last 25 years has been a drastic decline in the region’s rate of economic growth.

Latin America once enjoyed a healthy growth rate, with per capita income rising by about 80 percent from 1960 to 1979. However, the post-1980 period, which includes the so-called lost decade, has yielded disappointingly low levels of growth – about 12 percent in the last quarter-century. Mexico, for example, enjoyed growth rates in the pre-1980 era three times higher than those in the post-NAFTA period (since 1994).

globalexchange.org/campaigns/cafta/3218.html

Oh, yeah! I forgot you said:

I would disagree with your conclusion *even if *you had quoted someone who’s opinion on the economic affects of NAFTA et al should be taken seriously

very honest of you to admit you have such a closed mind. btw: what are YOUR credentials?

 

[sprout]

QUOTE=urban-hermit;2668000

I actually agree with you, EXCEPT that it is not our government who is doing the 3 things you listed above - it is the employers and illegal aliens (both of them) who are circumventing the law - THAT is what is causing the so-called exploitation and oppression.

I think you are overstating the “sins that cry out to heaven” scenario. But even if you are not, the culprit is most often those who disobey the law, more than the laws themselves.

Huh? are you saying the foreigner is oppressing the foreigner?
Oppressing himself? The stranger is not welcoming himself? Maybe you need to take closer scrutiny on the CCC reference above.

I understand *you feel *that the World Bank or NAFTA is causing poverty in Mexico. I’m not versed enough on the issue to say, but I would venture the opinion that those people were poor before NAFTA and the World Bank came on the scene.

It’s not a feeling. It’s an informed knowledge, based on having read up on the issue from varied sources i.e. the article I linked in response to Ender, Christopher Zehnder’s article previously quoted, statements made by the Holy Father also quoted previously and statements made by the American (that’s all of America North, Central, South and not just the US Bishops)

and no, Those People, were not as poor before NAFTA:

The most obvious failure of neoliberal reforms in Latin America over the last 25 years has been a drastic decline in the region’s rate of economic growth.

Latin America once enjoyed a healthy growth rate, with per capita income rising by about 80 percent from 1960 to 1979. However, the post-1980 period, which includes the so-called lost decade, has yielded disappointingly low levels of growth – about 12 percent in the last quarter-century. Mexico, for example, enjoyed growth rates in the pre-1980 era three times higher than those in the post-NAFTA period (since 1994).

globalexchange.org/campaigns/cafta/3218.html

Be that as it may, we Americans do care about the poor in other countries, as evidenced by the amounts of money we contribute to Catholic Relief Services and such. But there is only so much we can do to fix the problems of Mexico. Some of it they have to do.

That’s not a function of us not caring, or failing in love for our neighbor. It’s a function that there’s only so much we can possibly do without intervening in Mexico’s sovereignty over their own goofed-up system.

I agree completely that there is only so much we can do to “fix” a sovereignty. That’s why I suggest we fix our Nation first. Starting with following the suggestion of Pope Benedict XVI of releasing the burden of debt and structural adjustments on our 3rd world neighbors. This was a bad loan, made in bad faith. We should just let it go, consider it charity, eat our losses as a lesson learned. We should reform ourselves first. Take the log out of our own eye. Rethink the way we do business with our neighbors.

Then, work on fixing the problem from within. Keeping in mind always peace and good will towards our neighbor.

 

[Yerusalyim]

SPROUT,

You keep not answering questions that are essential in this debate, the first and most important one is this…DOES THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAVE A RIGHT AND A VESTED INTEREST IN KNOWING WHO IS ENTERING IT’S BORDERS?

 

[Ender]

I take it you don’t think ***formerly pro-NAFTA ***development economist Professor Riordan Roett of Johns Hopkins’ School of Advanced International Studies opinion should be taken seriously?

I was commenting on the reference you gave in post #90 (which is the only one I saw). Since you quoted him extensively I assumed you looked at him as a credible source. I haven’t seen your reference to Professor Roett’s comments.

I already know you discount the opinions of the Bishops, Papal Commissions, and even Our Holy Father Pope Benedict

You know nothing of the sort but if you can point to the pope’s comments on NAFTA I would be interested in reading them.

do you also discount the opinions of the U.S. International Trade Commission Study, and the U.S. Agency for International Development Study?

Give me the links and I’ll review them. I might disagree with them but I certainly wouldn’t dismiss them; they are serious sources.

very honest of you to admit you have such a closed mind. btw: what are YOUR credentials?

Generally when people resort to insults it’s because they can’t make an intellectual argument. Stick to referrencing (serious) sources that support your position.

Ender

 

[urban-hermit]

Huh? are you saying the foreigner is oppressing the foreigner?
Oppressing himself? The stranger is not welcoming himself? Maybe you need to take closer scrutiny on the CCC reference above.

Ok, let’s try to understand eachother here. You said, in post # 95,

So it is my position that by ordering, advising, praising, approving of, not disclosing or not hindering our governments when they attempt to:

• exploit the foreigners who live in your land.
• or fail to treat them " like everyone else, and you must love them as you love yourself. "
• molest or oppress a foreigner

then one is guilty of cooperating in these sins that “cry out to heaven for vengeance”

So the question is: ARE we doing these things? Let’s look at your first point first:

1 - are we “exploiting the foreigner”? Who is “we”? I do not think it could be the low-wage American worker - and I can speak as one - who is disappointed that he must do the work of 2 people and work like a dog for $8 an hour because there are stronger younger Mexicans here illegally who will do this gleefully because they know full well they are sending good money home and they will only be doing it for a few years anyway and then they will get to go back home and enjoy the nest egg they have saved. In three years, when they have gone back home, I am still here in America, still working like a dog, competing with the next wave of gleeful young Mexicans, here illegally on THEIR 3-year shift.

Do you see any injustice here? On which side?

 

[urban-hermit]

I agree completely that there is only so much we can do to “fix” a sovereignty. That’s why I suggest we fix our Nation first. Starting with following the suggestion of Pope Benedict XVI of releasing the burden of debt and structural adjustments on our 3rd world neighbors. This was a bad loan, made in bad faith. We should just let it go, consider it charity, eat our losses as a lesson learned. We should reform ourselves first. Take the log out of our own eye. Rethink the way we do business with our neighbors.

Then, work on fixing the problem from within. Keeping in mind always peace and good will towards our neighbor.

The solution to Mexico having entered into an agreement such as NAFTA that was not in their own best interests is not to shaft the low-wage American worker. Peace and good will does not mean laying down and being a doormat. There are other better ways to help your neighbor.

 

[RevDrNorth]

To knowingly break the just laws of another nation is to commit a sin. You can justify it any way you like but it is a sin. These folks want a better life but they are not starving to death in Mexico so it is not a matter of life and death. The other thing is that it lets foreign governments off the hook for dealing with their problems. Corruption and massively unequal distribution of wealth are issues that Mexcio and other nations need to fix. Letting people flood to other countries is beneficial to them because it holds off change, revolution, and brings back millions and millions in US dollars to fuel their nations economy.

Let’s look at this on a smaller scale. If someone in another neighborhood lives in a smaller home and does not have as much is it right for them to break into your house and set up shop? If you came home and found another family living in your home and they told you they would help you clean, etc but they were staying…you would not call them an “undocumented house guest”, you would likely call the police because they have committed a crime and are in your home illegally. It would not matter to you that they were just seeking a better life and you had a better home and enough space, or that they offered to contribute…you would want them out.

North