Looking for an Orthodox Catholic magazine that does NOT support illegal immigration in the U.S.

[lifeisbeautiful]

So because you feel someone (an illegal alien in this case) has a need, it’s okay to break laws? That means if your neighbor had a rough time he could break into your house, rob you and assault your family?

Or because everyone’s breaking a law that the law should be changed? Or because someone might be a ‘perfectly nice person?’

What about the rights of law-abiding citizens to live in a lawful country? Don’t you care about the people who struggled to actually BE immigrants and enter the country legally, rather than breaking a law? This is a slap in the face to all those legal immigrants this country has always welcomed. It’s a slap in the face to any law-abiding citizen.

The true racism and bigotry consists of lowering standards of behavior, treating people like children, and throwing out laws just because of a person’s ethnic origin or sex.

And that is the polar opposite of true charity: playing the ‘compassion’ card wrapped around the race card to stir up emotional support for lawbreakers.

I am torn on this issue, while my heart goes out to the families that seem to find illegal immigration to be their only hope to sustain their family, I have also seen people who have endured the hardships of becoming citizens legally, and some who have had to return to their countries and are still trying to come to the US legally, and who deserve these opportunities just as much. Respecting humans and being charitable does not mean we have to support the idea of an open border where people can come and go as they please, regardless of laws and “greater good”. I am definitely pro streamlining of the immigration process, and if possible and necessary, loosening of regulations that make it harder for honest hardworking people to come here to work, even if they are not considered super educated etc, but I also believe that if we have laws they should be enforced. If the laws are wrong, change them, but don’t just disregard them, especially since it can affect our national security.

 

[faithfully]

You know, I do think illegal immigration is a big drag on our economy.

I don’t think switching magazines is the way to fight it. Unless said magazine employs illegals at less that minimum wage.

Don’t go to a hotel in the State of CA. A large qty. of the hispanic employees are illegal.

Pay attn to where your produce comes from. Probably picked by an illegal. In fact, as displayed in this old article, perhaps even picked by a slave which makes this situation even worse. independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/slave-labour-that-shames-america-765881.html

The thing I’ve noticed, our “get our goods at the cheapest possible price” is really taking it’s toll on our country. We never really had issues with it, when we bought products from foreign countries, utilizing their treachorous labor practices and such. But now, local companies are having to find ways to compete with that loss of biz. And they do so by cutting costs. Which means hiring cheaper labor. (certainly not lowering exec. salaries.)

Also, don’t assume that illegals are paying taxes. Many write EXEMPT across the bottom of their W2, and there is little withholding.

I can see the humanitarian need to help people. But if they want our help, I do believe they should get it in a legal fashion. Just like our forefathers that showed up WithOut Papers, and became American Citizens. I have a friend that makes a HEFTY salary on boarder Patrol, often saving illegals from really bad circumstances where they were left behind in the land of good ol’ USA by some guy that took some serious cash from them… Just to be deported again. It’s a very sad, expensive vicious cycle.

 

[jwashu]

I’m looking to subscribe to a magazine that teaches and discusses traditional Catholic values from an Orthodox perspective. Unfortunately, every magazine I have seen so far lends their support to the USCCB’s decision to support illegal immigration and “amnesty.” I cannot agree with this policy that rewards people for violating their fellow human beings by: illegally moving into their country, violating their laws, selfishly usurping the limited resources of legal taxpayers who are struggling to raise their own families, and then claim to be “victims.”

This is hardly an un-Christian view. It is a sane view.

I guess I’m looking for a magazine that teaches Christianity AND common sense and isn’t afraid to call a spade a spade. Anyone have any recommendations??

Thanks

I would ask that you take a step back and ask if you are putting your political views before the teachings of the Church.

My suggestion would be to step outside your own world view and try to understand why our Bishops are teaching what they are and how that relates to the teachings of our Lord and Savior.

The Church is not going to agree 100% with either political party in the US or elsewhere. That is why we have to have a mind of our own and be open to new ideas. Much of what the Church teaches, and indeed what Christ teaches is very socialistic, in fact many of the early Christian communities were completely dependent upon one other - read the beatitudes and the sermon on the mount again if it’s been a while. The NT is very “left” from a Fiscal standpoint.

At the same time there are certain life and moral issues that have been championed by the right wing of our political system.

In my opinion there is no party for the devout Catholic, each vote and issue must be examined outside of the political realm then find the person or candidate who best fits what we believe and what the Church teaches.

Turning away from information is never a good idea IMHO.

Joe

 

[Nec5]

Has the Pope or someone in the higher echelon of Catholic authority given a detailed opinion on illegal immigration here in the States?

I know the Bishops here in the States are for essentially unrestricted borders, but is that official Catholic policy from the top?

 

[EasterJoy]

Has the Pope or someone in the higher echelon of Catholic authority given a detailed opinion on illegal immigration here in the States?

Interview with His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI, during his flight to America, Tuesday, 15 April 2008*The fundamental solution [to the situation of immigrants in the United States] is that there would no longer exist the need to emigrate because there would be in one’s own country sufficient work, a sufficient social fabric, such that no one has to emigrate. Therefore we should all work for this objective, for a social development that permits offering citizens work and a future in their land of origin. And also about this point, I would like to speak with the President, because above all the United States should help with the aim that these countries can develop in this way. This is in the interest of everyone, not just of these countries, but of the world, and also of the United States.

Besides this, short-term measures: It is very important to help the families above all. In the light of the conversations that I have had with the bishops, the principal problem is that there be protection for the families, that they not be destroyed. What can be done should be done. In the same way, naturally, all that is possible must be done to work against the instability of the situations and against all the violations, and to help so that they can have a truly dignified life where they find themselves in this moment.*

Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate:
“The reality of human solidarity, which is a benefit for us, also imposes a duty”[105]. Many people today would claim that they owe nothing to anyone, except to themselves. They are concerned only with their rights, and they often have great difficulty in taking responsibility for their own and other people’s integral development. Hence it is important to call for a renewed reflection on how rights presuppose duties, if they are not to become mere licence[106]. Nowadays we are witnessing a grave inconsistency. On the one hand, appeals are made to alleged rights, arbitrary and non-essential in nature, accompanied by the demand that they be recognized and promoted by public structures, while, on the other hand, elementary and basic rights remain unacknowledged and are violated in much of the world[107]. A link has often been noted between claims to a “right to excess”, and even to transgression and vice, within affluent societies, and the lack of food, drinkable water, basic instruction and elementary health care in areas of the underdeveloped world and on the outskirts of large metropolitan centres. The link consists in this: individual rights, when detached from a framework of duties which grants them their full meaning, can run wild, leading to an escalation of demands which is effectively unlimited and indiscriminate. An overemphasis on rights leads to a disregard for duties. Duties set a limit on rights because they point to the anthropological and ethical framework of which rights are a part, in this way ensuring that they do not become licence. Duties thereby reinforce rights and call for their defence and promotion as a task to be undertaken in the service of the common good. Otherwise, if the only basis of human rights is to be found in the deliberations of an assembly of citizens, those rights can be changed at any time, and so the duty to respect and pursue them fades from the common consciousness. Governments and international bodies can then lose sight of the objectivity and “inviolability” of rights. When this happens, the authentic development of peoples is endangered[108]. Such a way of thinking and acting compromises the authority of international bodies, especially in the eyes of those countries most in need of development. Indeed, the latter demand that the international community take up the duty of helping them to be “artisans of their own destiny”[109], that is, to take up duties of their own. The sharing of reciprocal duties is a more powerful incentive to action than the mere assertion of rights.

…

1. Another aspect of integral human development that is worthy of attention is the phenomenon of migration. This is a striking phenomenon because of the sheer numbers of people involved, the social, economic, political, cultural and religious problems it raises, and the dramatic challenges it poses to nations and the international community. We can say that we are facing a social phenomenon of epoch-making proportions that requires bold, forward-looking policies of international cooperation if it is to be handled effectively. Such policies should set out from close collaboration between the migrants’ countries of origin and their countries of destination; it should be accompanied by adequate international norms able to coordinate different legislative systems with a view to safeguarding the needs and rights of individual migrants and their families, and at the same time, those of the host countries. No country can be expected to address today’s problems of migration by itself. We are all witnesses of the burden of suffering, the dislocation and the aspirations that accompany the flow of migrants. The phenomenon, as everyone knows, is difficult to manage; but there is no doubt that foreign workers, despite any difficulties concerning integration, make a significant contribution to the economic development of the host country through their labour, besides that which they make to their country of origin through the money they send home. Obviously, these labourers cannot be considered as a commodity or a mere workforce. They must not, therefore, be treated like any other factor of production. Every migrant is a human person who, as such, possesses fundamental, inalienable rights that must be respected by everyone and in every circumstance[142].

 

[EasterJoy]

If you read the papal encyclicals, the general idea you get is this:
A nation has the right to sovereignity, and to enforce its sovereign borders.
We are not released from the demands of justice simply because the poor in our midst live across a border. The Church has no borders. Humanity has no borders.
The Church has a duty to tell countries what their duties are as instruments in the service of the common good of mankind. It is not, however, for the Church to dictate exactly how the demands of justice are to be met. This is the legitimate function of civil government.

In broad strokes, those things are what makes this a delicate and complex problem. Delicacy and complexity, however, do not make a duty into one we have no Christian duty to at least try to achieve.
“I was a stranger and you welcomed me” (Mt 25:35). It is the Church’s task not only to present constantly the Lord’s teaching of faith but also to indicate its appropriate application to the various situations which the changing times continue to create. Today the illegal migrant comes before us like that “stranger” in whom Jesus asks to be recognized. To welcome him and to show him solidarity is a duty of hospitality and fidelity to Christian identity itself.*

–Pope John Paul II–Message for World Migration Day, 1996.

 

[Tietjen]

So because you feel someone (an illegal alien in this case) has a need, it’s okay to break laws?

No. I fully support the enforcement of just laws. However, when a law disregards a basic “need” (your word) such as preventing a man from WORKing in order to feed his family (so that they don’t DIE), that is when I take issue with the law. As a Christian, I don’t set the “law of the land” before Christ and what He taught. If I did, that would make me a Sunday Only Catholic and my Christian service would end when I walked out of mass. There are enough of those in the United States.

That means if your neighbor had a rough time he could break into your house, rob you and assault your family?

Okay… try to follow me for a second.

First, what I am in favor of is allowing human beings to work and get paid in order that they may provide food for their families. What you have suggested above is that working for pay is the same as breaking into and robbing a house and then assaulting the family who lives there.

Second, if my neighbor had a rough time he wouldn’t have to break into my house, rob and assault my family. I would offer him my help. I know that sounds completely foreign to some, but it’s what ALL Christians are called to do. It’s hard to believe that some people actually take it seriously huh?

Or because everyone’s breaking a law that the law should be changed? Or because someone might be a ‘perfectly nice person?’

You’re assuming that the reason why I support reform is “because everyone’s breaking a law” or because “someone might be perfectly nice.” But apparently you haven’t been listening. I want reform so that those who are forced into a situation where they must decide between watching their family starve or violating a border law are not made to suffer because they choose to cross the border and WORK to keep their family alive.

What about the rights of law-abiding citizens to live in a lawful country? Don’t you care about the people who struggled to actually BE immigrants and enter the country legally, rather than breaking a law? This is a slap in the face to all those legal immigrants this country has always welcomed. It’s a slap in the face to any law-abiding citizen.

No it’s not. It doesn’t take away their citizenship, their job, their food, house or medical care. They still remain citizens of the U.S. Do you remember Matthew 20:1-16
Matthew 20:1-16:

[1]“For the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard.
[2] After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard.
[3] And going out about the third hour he saw others standing idle in the market place;
[4] and to them he said, You go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right I will give you.' So they went. [5] Going out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour, he did the same. [6] And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing; and he said to them, Why do you stand here idle all day?’
[7] They said to him, Because no one has hired us.' He said to them, You go into the vineyard too.’
[8] And when evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his steward, Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last, up to the first.' [9] And when those hired about the eleventh hour came, each of them received a denarius. [10] Now when the first came, they thought they would receive more; but each of them also received a denarius. [11] And on receiving it they grumbled at the householder, [12] saying, These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.’
[13] But he replied to one of them, `Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius?
[14] Take what belongs to you, and go; I choose to give to this last as I give to you.
[15] Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?’
[16] So the last will be first, and the first last.”

The true racism and bigotry consists of lowering standards of behavior, treating people like children, and throwing out laws just because of a person’s ethnic origin or sex.

Not because of a person’s ethnic origin or sex but rather reforming laws in such a way as to protect its citizens while at the same time recognizing that a very real need exists to allow others a means of feeding the families.

And that is the polar opposite of true charity: playing the ‘compassion’ card wrapped around the race card to stir up emotional support for lawbreakers.

I haven’t mentioned race once. You seem fixated on it however. Your version of charity ends at the border (if not your own front door) while the Church actually supports helping all of mankind. You insinuate that our Church’s Bishops are racists and bigots because they support helping a people that you would just assume forget about. Me… I’ll side with the USCCB on this issue. Charity and the Catholic Church go hand and hand. If that makes any feel uncomfortable or angry tell it to God, because I’m done with this thread.

 

[Nec5]

Long quote of Benedict/Church’s views.

Why did you make me read that? I want specifics. Is sealing the border immoral? What is the stance?

Those statements are not specific. I’ll quickly summarize and then state the problem with each.

1. We should make it so all countries grow and have economic opportunity. Probably a pipe dream although it is one we should always pursue like world peace. However, that long term goal says nothing to us in the here and now.
2. Protect and keep families intact. A worthwhile idea. We can deport the entire family which will keep it intact.
3. Rights versus duty. A good point, but a country can remain sovereign and simultaneously fulfill its duty to aid all others without opening willy-nilly immigration.
4. We should treat individuals with respect. Migrants should not be treated as slaves. I agree. We should neither let in illegal immigrants to do sweatshop labor here or give companies breaks to essentially exploit overseas slave labor.

So what is the official opinion about the States’ immigration policy and deportation? What about private property rights, as in we citizens own the USA and can determine who gets to come here?

 

[EasterJoy]

Why did you make me read that? I want specifics. Is sealing the border immoral? What is the stance?

Those statements are not specific. I’ll quickly summarize and then state the problem with each.

1. We should make it so all countries grow and have economic opportunity. Probably a pipe dream although it is one we should always pursue like world peace. However, that long term goal says nothing to us in the here and now.
2. Protect and keep families intact. A worthwhile idea. We can deport the entire family which will keep it intact.
3. Rights versus duty. A good point, but a country can remain sovereign and simultaneously fulfill its duty to aid all others without opening willy-nilly immigration.
4. We should treat individuals with respect. Migrants should not be treated as slaves. I agree. We should neither let in illegal immigrants to do sweatshop labor here or give companies breaks to essentially exploit overseas slave labor.

So what is the official opinion about the States’ immigration policy and deportation? What about private property rights, as in we citizens own the USA and can determine who gets to come here?

“Probably a pipe dream although it is one we should always pursue like world peace. However, that long term goal says nothing to us in the here and now.”
It says nothing to us? Name a single long-term goal you have ever reached in your own life without making concrete steps toward it over a long period of time. Being hungry with no prospects for work, while you watch your children get thin: this is extremely concrete. Maybe that is why people try a lot harder to migrate here for illegal work than we try to help them find a legal solution back home to that very here and now problem they have.

Do you really want the Church to dictate to the United States what her immigration policy will be, instead of expecting American Catholics to do the intellectual work of studying the problem in the light of Church teaching, the creative work of considering solutions, and the political work of advocating for the poor and vulnerable on both sides of the border while balancing the reasonable expectation of enjoying the fruits of one’s own labor without fear of invasion? I hope not, because the Church won’t do that.

We Americans can determine who gets to come here, but I would not get too carried away with this business of “owning” the USA. We have been given care of the USA, we are given permission by Heaven to enjoy the fruits of our labors, but we will also be expected to answer before God for our use of the gratuitous gifts He has showered on this country, and on us as individuals, and our treatment of God’s creation and our fellow human beings.

Remember the story of Lazarus and the rich man. In fact, if you read every Gospel, front to back, you’ll find that private property carries far more temptations and responsibilities than rights.

I think that is why the Bible is not more popular than it is. It is a bit more concrete than people like, so much so that they don’t want to take it seriously.

 

[EasterJoy]

I know the Bishops here in the States are for essentially unrestricted borders, but is that official Catholic policy from the top?

Maybe this will help:
"The Church and Undocumented Migrants and Refugees,
including those who are not Christians*
Archbishop Stephen Fumio HAMAO
President, Pontifical Council for Migrants and Itinerants

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/migrants/documents/rc_pc_migrants_doc_2003031_fesa_hamao_en.html

A selection (boldface mine):
The Church therefore reaches out to all those in need, without asking for documents or a baptismal certificate. Furthermore, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in full accord with the Gospel teachings, states: “Everyone has the right to life.” Thus, even asylum-seekers and migrants in an illegal situation have the right to be provided with the necessary means of subsistence. It is a right that surpasses any positive law.

Yes. Those who are without the necessary means of subsistence have the right to live, a right that supercedes any positive law.

I am not an expert, but by my reading of the law, if the migrant cannot feed his or her family in any other way, then he or she may morally transgress any country’s positive laws in order to do so. As long as situations exist where people would starve if they did not work illegally, then there will be morally-permissible illegal immigration for the purpose of otherwise moral occupation.

The Church is not in favor of unrestricted borders. Nevertheless, the Church will not argue in favor of a situation that separates those who could eat from the *only means available *to do honest work for basic sustenance for themselves and for their families. I would hope that none of us would. As long as feeding a family is a pipe dream in the country next door, we’re going to either have illegal immigration or a lot of people who literally die trying.

Can’t you put yourself in that position? Are you really saying you’d let your children starve rather than disobey an immigration law that keeps you from working for a living, and at work that no one else wants to do? Is that some kind of theft, to do honest work that no one will do? Really? Yet we know that immigrants’ desparation to work lowers wages, both lowering food prices and making the job too low-paying to allow for the nutrition and hygiene people expect here. That is why this is not an easy question. The strings lead everywhere. Somehow, though, I don’t think the conundrum rests primarily on the man who finds next-to-nothing preferable to nothing at all. Surely he is not the only one with a moral question to answer.

 

[cecillia]

I’m with the people who don’t advise trying to find a magazine that picks and chooses what it will support coming out of the USCCB on this one issue. You might find magazines that support the issue on USCCB on some issues and not others, but I’d not hold my breath on this one.

On the “sane” issue, where did you get the idea that Christianity is about “common sense”, as you define it? The whole world has common sense:

“…to you who hear I say, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. To the person who strikes you on one cheek, offer the other one as well, and from the person who takes your cloak, do not withhold even your tunic. Give to everyone who asks of you, and from the one who takes what is yours do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you. For if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do the same. If you lend money to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit (is) that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, and get back the same amount. But rather, love your enemies and do good to them, and lend expecting nothing back; then your reward will be great and you will be children of the Most High, for he himself is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. Be merciful, just as (also) your Father is merciful.”
Luke 6:27-36

Read all of Luke, or even just Luke 6, and tell me that these are the words of a “sane” and “law-abiding” person with the least interest in protecting your property from a hungry man.

It’s not that I’m against countries enforcing their sovereign borders. Rather, if we are going to be within the Gospel, we need to be as intent on penalizing those who fatten themselves (and, sometimes, ourselves in the process) on the toil of illegal immigrants as we are about keeping the immigrants from taking advantage of our other resources. You can’t just use another human being only until he becomes a burden, failing to protect him from unscrupulous employers, and only when he needs help start complaining at the crime he committed by entering the country illegally. That is where our lack of consistency comes in, IMHO.

I so agree and may I add that we are compiling a huge separate secret “economic” invisible slavey. IT IS WRONG! Furthermore they are being used by our greedy Government at this time, as “political” slaves as-well. To USE people who are desperate as political ping pong balls. These people are so desperate to have relief from starvation for their own families back in Mexico they will work for slave wages just to eat! And so true THEY are committing a crime that we Turn a blind eye too because we either want a future slave vote or a full blown “Economic slave” Now if we would block off our border. THAT would be the KINDEST thing to do. These people are going to become a half a citizen = road to citizenship! There is no road to citizen ship. We are BROKE we are desperate too, to have SLAVE cheap Labor. If the Labor were to be controlled, it would loose its value to America. I am wondering just where we go from here? A President who supports the barbaric tearing of an eighth month beautiful fetus in half. And on hIs other tongue he boldly say’s he also supports illegal “migration” even though it gos against our constitution, and makes desperate Mexican people into criminals for CHEAP work. We already have a gazzilion laws on the books covering all boarder states. It just is wrong. When will Americans be willing to take off the blinders and speak. Just SAY OUT LOAD what is on your mind. And don’t be afraid too. That’s all Good Night and God Bless …

 

[EasterJoy]

I so agree and may I add that we are compiling a huge separate secret “economic” invisible slavey. IT IS WRONG! Furthermore they are being used by our greedy Government at this time, as “political” slaves as-well. To USE people who are desperate as political ping pong balls. These people are so desperate to have relief from starvation for their own families back in Mexico they will work for slave wages just to eat! And so true THEY are committing a crime that we Turn a blind eye too because we either want a future slave vote or a full blown “Economic slave” Now if we would block off our border. THAT would be the KINDEST thing to do. These people are going to become a half a citizen = road to citizenship! There is no road to citizen ship. We are BROKE we are desperate too, to have SLAVE cheap Labor. If the Labor were to be controlled, it would loose its value to America. I am wondering just where we go from here? A President who supports the barbaric tearing of an eighth month beautiful fetus in half. And on hIs other tongue he boldly say’s he also supports illegal “migration” even though it gos against our constitution, and makes desperate Mexican people into criminals for CHEAP work. We already have a gazzilion laws on the books covering all boarder states. It just is wrong. When will Americans be willing to take off the blinders and speak. Just SAY OUT LOAD what is on your mind. And don’t be afraid too. That’s all Good Night and God Bless …

I think this captures the OP’s problem in a nutshell:

This is obviously a complex moral problem.
There is no black-and-white solution proposed by the Church, either for governments or for individuals, only the clear teaching that this is a serious moral issue that cannot be ignored.

Therefore, it is going to be discussed in Catholic magazines. Orthodox Catholic magazine are at least going to have some respect for the opinions of the USCCB on the issue. There really is no getting around it.

Maybe it does not hurt if Catholics across the entire political spectrum are thinking about this issue in terms of the entire depth of Catholic moral teaching, though. This is a complex issue, probably not one whose answer will occur only to the right or only to the left. (Yes, I said that!)

In our physical bodies, you have to have two eyes to have depth perception. You cannot get that if you only have one point of view. That is why we are the Body of Christ, and why the Lord did not give us a “Me and Jesus” spirituality. We need each other in order to see the whole truth of what love demands of us, to not just see it with depth, but to hear it with direction, to feel it with a fine touch, to speak it with clarity and conviction, to walk it with both resolve and balance, and to do the required lifting with strength. We really do need all of us!

Maybe that is what Catholics can also bring to this issue: a mutually respectful relationship with people up and down the political spectrum, an ability to be patient and kind to those who have very different views, and a stomach for truths that ask for a loving sacrifice from everyone involved in a question. Maybe the answer to this problem, both how to solve it and how to advance the most just solution politically, lies within the Body of Christ.

 

[copeland45]

The national security ramifications of this issue have not been adequately discussed except by one very intelligent poster.

We need to KNOW who is coming into this country and who is already here. Don’t think for a second that militant Islamists have not recognized that the soft southwestern border is a perfect entry point.

Yet, the USCCB says it’s “Nazi-like” to request to see someone’s papers to verify that they are legally in the country. Well, what do they think happens at the Vatican? Does the Vatican just let strangers roam in the buildings and grounds without knowing who they are? This is what I mean about the hypocrisy of Church leadership on this issue.

In addition, I have heard NO ONE criticize Mexico for not raising the standards of its citizens so that they do not have to flee. Why is it the sole responsibility of the U.S. (which is broke, by the way…look at California’s budget!) to provide for people who have broken the laws to live in darkness.

To Tietjen: not everyone who comes to America illegally is “starving” and “dying”. Partner, you need to come to Arizona and talk to our police departments so that you know what is going on. Right now you dont, and neither does the USCCB.

Charity and love should not just be extended to illegal immigrants, it should also be extended to legal taxpayers. Currently they aren’t getting any of either, at least not in Texas, Arizona and California.

 

[copeland45]

One more question to Tietjen and anyone else who is in favor of unrestricted borders:

The state of California this morning laid off 150,000 state employees because it couldn’t afford to pay them. Why not? Because the state has gone broke providing medical care, food, school tuition, and housing to more than 10 million illegal immigrants.

So what about these 150,000 tax-paying citizens? What would Christ say about the way they’ve been treated?

 

[Alexander_Smith]

One more question to Tietjen and anyone else who is in favor of unrestricted borders:

The state of California this morning laid off 150,000 state employees because it couldn’t afford to pay them. Why not? Because the state has gone broke providing medical care, food, school tuition, and housing to more than 10 million illegal immigrants.

So what about these 150,000 tax-paying citizens? What would Christ say about the way they’ve been treated?

I think it’s pretty clear that illegal immigrants have no business in this country. Yes we’ll provide them with the assistance they need… to get back to their own country. The number of illegals pouring in every year is just ridiculous, and it needs to be stopped. God bless Arizona for doing so.

Also, I wish people would stop romanticizing the issue by acting as if every illegal immigrant is a father with his wife and kids who just wants some work. That is only PARTLY true. A lot of illegals who come into the country are violent criminals, drug dealers, and other unsavory types.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

I have a hard time with this subject (and with health care) and trying to figure out and understand the position of the USCCB on these topics. It just seems to me that these are two big problems that one could try to solve through different ways and, while there are some fundamental truths that cannot be denied, I wonder how much of the proposed positions are positions we should be taking and how many are opinions that we can disagree with and believe another strategy would be better to reach the same good. I should probably study this more, but every time I have delved into it, I always come out wondering.

 

[copeland45]

This issue is NOT as complex as people think !!

It boils down to a simple question:

Can the U.S. allow everyone in the world who wants live here move in? If the answer is “no” (which it clearly is since there are 6 billion people in the world) then the only question becomes: “what is the right number”?

The “right number” is what the GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES says is the right number through its Immigration and Naturalization Service. It is NOT the number that the USCCB says it “should be”, or the Vatican, or what Mexico says it should be. We, the taxpayers of the U.S. through our elected officials are the only ones who should be determing the “right amount” of immigrants based upon what our economy can and will support. Arizona is simply trying to enforce federal law.

Also, I have found my publication: it’s called "The Wanderer"

freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2494923/posts

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Laws against theft do not need to be re-written. They need to be enforced. Laws against murder do not need to be re-written. They need to be enforced.

So too - laws against illegal aliens do not need to be re-written. They need to be enforced.

Those who call for open borders in the name of ‘compassion’ open the doors to no borders anywhere.

Your house has borders. Your person has borders. Those laws, too, will be rewritten—to redistribute what was once rightfully yours.

It has already happened.

 

[JAGCath28]

I think many people who support illegal immigration due to our duties as Christians, should listen to Jesse Romero’s CAL broadcast on the Spiritual Implications of Illegal Immigration.

Many of these immigrants who are coming over to support their families in other countries, are falling into sin in our country. They are starting new families, and no longer providing for their first families. These aren’t just a few occurrence here, but happens more often than people realize. Jesse’s talk about how this illegal immigration is affecting the family is something that everyone should think about. It’s only about an hour talk. You should really listen to it.

 

[notredame_999]

New Oxford Review. A country has a right to protect its borders. It is not un-Christian to deport someone who broke into this country even if it was for good intentions.