Jorge Garcia, husband and father of two, deported Jan 15 2018 (MLK Day)

[twf]

He was also a child when he was first brought to the US… that isn’t a factor at all?

 

[Arkansan]

Should he have more rights than Mexicans whose parents didn’t illegally bring them to the US?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

The objection that it’s unfair for them to have to leave their school and local community holds no water unless you also want to ban internal migration of families.

It is unfair to force them against their will.

The difference between them and I is that I’m not a Mexican. My ancestors have lived here for generations.

If some of your ancestors had come from Mexico that would not make a forced deportation any easier for you to take than it would now.

Just glossing over the fact that that’s where their roots are doesn’t make it go away.

Their roots being in Mexico does not make it any easier.

This is a good time to remind everyone that the blessings we have, including the blessings of where we live, are undeserved gifts from God. No one, not you, not I, truly deserve to have these blessings. Keep that in mind when talking about “the difference between us and them.”

 

[exnihilo]

“Law is the Law”

Aight, folks. I guess we gotta let the abortion law stand since, well, law is law.

Let’s be consistent here and defend all life. If you were brought to another country at age 10, and since had a family with no criminal record, would you think it just to be separated from your family?

Nope. Abortion violates natural law. Immigration laws uphold it. Immigration law should be honored because it is just. Abortion law should not be honored because it is unjust.

Anyway abortion should be illegal. The law that shouldn’t be honored is the judicial decisions that usurp the right of the people to make abortion illegal.

 

[exnihilo]

Also, it is contrary to the Golden Rule to suggest that immigration to Mexico for his family is okay, but immigration to the US for him is not.

How is it contrary to the a Golden Rule?

 

[DarkLight]

They’re free to go to Mexico with him, no one’s forcing his family stay here without him. He is the one who has made a hardship on his family, not the US government.

One point here is his (disabled) wife is likely to face difficulty in entering Mexico. Another is that she most likely doesn’t speak spanish, and there’s a good chance his children aren’t fluent - meaning that they would be sent into a country where they can’t get around, can’t go to school without several years of remedial training, and so forth.

Language is actually a common issue with children brought in illegally very young - that they do not speak the language of their “home” country and have little knowledge of the culture.

 

[DarkLight]

Technically there are ways for those who are here illegally to regularize their situation, but that can usually only happen when the undocumented immigrant has an immediate family relationship (spouse/parent/child) who is a US citizen or permanent resident. Children are not able to petition and sponsor their undocumented parents until they are 21 years old. It’s easier for undocumented immigrants who entered with a visa and overstayed; they don’t have to leave the country for processing. It’s a lot longer process for undocumented immigrants who crossed the border undetected, because after a long application process, they will have to leave the country for the consular interview, the final step.

It also requires the sponsor to have sufficient income on their own to support the immigrant. If his wife isn’t making enough money on her own to provide for him, her, and their children, she won’t be allowed to bring him over unless someone else agrees to sign to support him.

 

[exnihilo]

It’s completely ridiculous and not very compassionate for someone to suggest that the rest of his family must go to Mexico when the USA has ALWAYS been their home, when his wife and children are legal American citizens, and when he was brought to the USA when only 10 years old and has since been a productive member of society for a few decades.

The man didn’t have to marry and didn’t have to have a family. He chose to do that. He might have even done so hoping that would prevent him from being deported. So what you basically advocate is so long as someone can sneak into this country and have a kid here they don’t get deported. That would be a disastrous immigration policy.

 

[pnewton]

It is contrary to the universal reciprocity to say that they could all go live in Mexico, but they could not all go live in the United States, that Mexico should allow the family to be together, but not the United States. The in the mind of a hypocrite are morals not universal.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

The man didn’t have to marry and didn’t have to have a family. He chose to do that. He might have even done so hoping that would prevent him from being deported. So what you basically advocate is so long as someone can sneak into this country and have a kid here they don’t get deported. That would be a disastrous immigration policy.

You keep forgetting, he was brought here as a child. He did not “sneak into” this country. It is uncharitable to suppose he married and had children just in the hopes that it would save him from being deported. It doesn’t even make sense because he would have no way of knowing that it would provide that benefit at the time he married. Also if you are calling normalization of dreamers a disastrous policy, remember that 80-90% of the American people are in favor of it.

Also, this would not be a disastrous policy if it is coupled with improved border security, and the will to handle cases of “sneaking” quickly before the person can get established, then it is our own fault for letting things get that far. And by the way, most illegal immigrants do not “sneak in.” They overstay their visas.

 

[Arkansan]

Arkansan:

The objection that it’s unfair for them to have to leave their school and local community holds no water unless you also want to ban internal migration of families.

It is unfair to force them against their will.

It’s unfair for parents to force their children to move?

I think we’ve reached a reductio ad absurdum.

It is contrary to the universal reciprocity to say that they could all go live in Mexico, but they could not all go live in the United States, that Mexico should allow the family to be together, but not the United States. The in the mind of a hypocrite are morals not universal.

Has his wife done (or omitted) anything that merits an immigration ban under Mexican law?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

It’s unfair for parents to force their children to move?

It is unfair for the government to force the whole family to move.

I think we’ve reached a reductio ad absurdum.

It is contrary to the universal reciprocity to say that they could all go live in Mexico, but they could not all go live in the United States, that Mexico should allow the family to be together, but not the United States. The in the mind of a hypocrite are morals not universal.

Has his wife done (or omitted) anything that merits an immigration ban under Mexican law?

If you allow that Mexican law can be just as arbitrary as our laws, then it does not matter if you think she should be allowed to immigrate.

 

[pnewton]

Has his wife done (or omitted) anything that merits an immigration ban under Mexican law?

That is completely irrelevant to morality. The Golden Rule and Categorical Imperative challenge us to question what is right and wrong, not determine what is legal. To the contrary, this difference between the current immigration law in the United States and what is morally good is exactly why every bishop to a man has called for reform to a more compassionate and generous immigration policy and a change in the law. Racial discrimination was once the law. That did not make it right. There too the Catholic Church was among those calling out for a change in the law to make it compassionate and just.

Your argument would have looked an a cesspool of toilet facilities and are real cesspool-hole of a school in the United States and say, “There is nothing wrong. It is separate facilities are legal.”

 

[Arkansan]

It is unfair for the government to force the whole family to move.

The government isn’t forcing the whole family to move, and they aren’t forcing them not to. That is up to this man and his wife.

If you allow that Mexican law can be just as arbitrary as our laws, then it does not matter if you think she should be allowed to immigrate.

Mexican law does allow spousal migration, I’m not sure what your point is.

Arkansan:

Has his wife done (or omitted) anything that merits an immigration ban under Mexican law?

That is completely irrelevant to morality. The Golden Rule and Categorical Imperative challenge us to question what is right and wrong, not determine what is legal.

The Golden Rule is that we should treat others as we expect to be treated. Pursuant to that, I posed the relevant question in reverse. That you’ve ducked it and run off on another subject is telling.

 

[upant]

The OP article. Just read it.

he was granted stays

a little different than the order was stayed in 2009

I’ll stick with the bishops.

do the bishop allow us to jail other american criminals with families? what is the difference.

what is his back story? did he have a family when he lost the court battle in 2006?

When they do not, they face the

possibility of being returned to their countries of origin.

isn’t that what took place?

should deny illegal immigrants there status as human beings.

how is being subject to the law being denied your status as a human being.

is quite likely that they will - or be voted out of office.

that is how it is supposed to work, not break the rules to appease the majority.

hese children have lived their whole lives in the US

how old are they?

Another is that she most likely doesn’t speak spanish, and there’s a good chance his children aren’t fluent -

do we know what language they speak for a fact?

 

[tweedlealice]

Blessings,
Breaking civil laws is a sin to a Christian. Many Centeal and South American countries are Catholic.
A judge wouldn’t address the sin aspect. That is the Churches place. If our church, taught to legally enter other countries, b/c illegally entering was a sin, perchance, it would slow down illegal entry???
Just a thought
In Christ’s love
Tweedlealice

 

[Arkansan]

Please read what i wrote and the Handbook of Moral Theology I linked to.

 

[MonteRCMS]

He had sooo many years to get his paperwork in order.

 

[tweedlealice]

DACA is safe if Dems don’t threaten other issues w GOP. Tonight Dems boycotted the budget bill that included 6 yrs for CHIP. DACA wasn’t part of it. The Dems wanted to make it part of it. Govt got shut down. DACA has till March 5 th.
Everyone wants DACA protected. Amnesty isn’t necessary. Making legal w geeen cards and visas w a pathway to citizenship is good. No chain migration. No lotteries. To see Mom, go visit her. She brought you here and left you. Shouldn’t reward her. No more illegals.
In Christs love
Tweedlealice

 

[MonteRCMS]

DACA is safe if Dems don’t threaten other issues w GOP. Tonight Dems boycotted the budget bill that included 6 yrs for CHIP. DACA wasn’t part of it. The Dems wanted to make it part of it. Govt got shut down. DACA has till March 5 th.

Everyone wants DACA protected. Amnesty isn’t necessary. Making legal w geeen cards and visas w a pathway to citizenship is good. No chain migration. No lotteries. To see Mom, go visit her. She brought you here and left you. Shouldn’t reward her. No more illegals.

In Christs love

Tweedlealice

DACA doesn’t really actually exist. It is not written into our law. In reality, former President Obama should get a bill for the cost.