Mexico Deploys A Formidable Deportation Force Near Its Own Southern Border

[Pup7]

The US is by far the largest donor of money and resources to the UNHCR

Yes, yes we are.

I’ve helped get UN mission crews ready that were delivering food, defense materiel, medical supplies and personnel, and things like tents and cots to UN-designated areas. This is the stuff they don’t publicize on the news when they scream about the military industrial complex - who builds and services those C-17s and C-5s that actually haul this stuff from the US and Europe to wherever the UN needs it? That would be Boeing, for starters. And the US Air Force. And many, many others.

From unhcr.org:

http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/partners...-unhcr-budget-year-2015-31-december-2015.html

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[RyanBlack]

No, Canada doesn’t have a moral obligation under Catholic teaching, because they have nothing to do with the Church.

That’s not what the Catechism of the Catholic Church states. Having “nothing to do with the Church” does not change what a nation’s moral obligation is. Where the CCC states,
“The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin.”
it does not exclude those nations that “have nothing to do with the Church.”

 

[Pup7]

1. The example of Canada was a hypothetical.
2. Canada is legally nor morally under no binding obligation to the Catholic Church, even though the CCC says they should. The RCC can’t force any sovereign nation to do anything, actually. It can voice its opinion and it can tell it what it’s doing is wrong, but it can’t force Canada to do anything.

Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are, believe it or not, wealthy nations. I really don’t believe they care much what the CCC has to say on moral obligation to much of anything.

That’s what I mean.

(Ironic in a way, as lately Canada can’t force the RCC to do anything either, though I digress.)

 

[RyanBlack]

1. The example of Canada was a hypothetical.
2. Canada is legally nor morally under no obligation to the Catholic Church, even though the CCC says they should. The RCC can’t force any sovereign nation to do anything, actually. It can voice its opinion and it can tell it what it’s doing is wrong, but it can’t force Canada to do anything.

Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are, believe it or not, wealthy nations. I really don’t believe they care much what the CCC has to say on moral obligation to much of anything.

That’s what I mean.

Of course the Church can’t force a nation to do anything. I’m perfectly aware of that. However, the role of the Church is to teach on matters of faith and morals, and just because a nation ignores what Church teaching is doesn’t change the truth of Church teaching.

 

[Pup7]

Of course the Church can’t force a nation to do anything.

Which is exactly what I said.

However, the role of the Church is to teach on matters of faith and morals, and just because a nation ignores what Church teaching is doesn’t change the truth of Church teaching.

Who said anything about or against any of this? All I said was a sovereign nation is under no obligation to the RCC.

 

[RyanBlack]

Who said anything about any of this?

I believe you said earlier in the thread that a nation doesn’t have a moral obligation because it has nothing to do with the Church.

 

[Pup7]

I believe you said earlier in the thread that a nation doesn’t have a moral obligation because it has nothing to do with the Church.

No, that is not what I said. This is:

No, Canada doesn’t have a moral obligation under Catholic teaching, because they have nothing to do with the Church. They are a sovereign nation that can act according to the needs of their own citizens. They are under no actual legal obligation to do a thing. Would they? Possibly - but if they didn’t they wouldn’t be wrong.

You took a phrase out of context and aren’t reading it the way it’s written.

They are not obligated to anything in the CCC. I said they have no moral obligation under Catholic teaching because they have nothing to do with - i.e., are not subject to - the Church. And they’re not. They’re not legally tied to it, and they’re under no obligation to agree with what the Church says.

I am now done with repeating myself.

 

[RyanBlack]

They are not obligated to anything in the CCC. I said they have no moral obligation under Catholic teaching because they have nothing to do with - i.e., are not subject to - the Church. And they’re not. They’re not legally tied to it, and they’re under no obligation to agree with what the Church say

This is simply incorrect. The moral obligation exists whether or not a nation is subject to the Church.

 

[Pup7]

I said they do not have to do anything. I did not say they wouldn’t nor that they should. I said they don’t have to do anything. And that is one hundred percent correct.

And they don’t. They can choose to do nothing. They are not obligated to do anything as written in the CCC because it is not their law.

This kind of stuff is what makes me crazy when the US steps in on situations like Chechnya and the Ukraine and everyone loses their minds because the US is “butting in”. Or when I was in Kosovo with - guess who? - the UN forces in 2000. Syria in 2016/2017. Yet all of that was oh so wrong of us.

You are expounding on a hypothetical here that was a conversation from upthread that in reality has very little to do with the subject of this thread.

I think we’ve all derailed this thread enough.

 

[Theo520]

Canada’s obligations are best covered by their signing the two UN agreements on refugees.
I think these agreements are in line with RCC doctrine.

Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees - Wikipedia

 

[RyanBlack]

I said they do not have to do anything. I did not say they wouldn’t nor that they should. I said they don’t have to do anything. And that is one hundred percent correct.

Of course they don’t have to do anything the Church says, and neither does any other country. I am simply pointing out what the Church says is the obligation of prosperous nations. It is very clearly stated as an obligation in 2241 of the CCC.

 

[Pup7]

Exactly. We write treaties because we know we all have an obligation to step in when it’s warranted. Or for our own mutual protection and support.

We belong to many of them. The UN. NATO. I could go on and on.

 

[Pup7]

Of course they don’t have to do anything the Church says, and neither does any other country. I am simply pointing out what the Church says is the obligation of prosperous nations. It is very clearly stated as an obligation in 2241 of the CCC.

Forgive me for saying this, but I have to wonder if you think I’m daft. Or illiterate. Because it’s been repeated to me multiple times what’s in the CCC as if I’m incapable of reading it, either in the book or on the screen.

 

[RyanBlack]

Forgive me for saying this, but I have to wonder if you think I’m daft. Or illiterate. Because it’s been repeated to me multiple times what’s in the CCC as if I’m incapable of reading it, either in the book or on the screen.

I don’t think you’re illiterate or incapable of reading it. However, you have made statements in the thread that deny that nations have an obligation to help. That was the reason for my thinking you were simply unaware of the teaching, not that you are illiterate or stupid.

 

[Pup7]

However, you have made statements in the thread that deny that nations have an obligation to help.

No, I did not.

Oh. My. Lord.

What I said - HYPOTHETICALLY - was that a nation can choose not to - they’re under no obligation to help if they choose to stay out of it. It’s a lousy policy called isolationism that usually doesn’t work (unless you’re, say, Saudi Arabia, and you actually don’t care what happens anywhere outside of the Persian Gulf area).

What part of anything I’ve written did you not understand - and did you not get that everything you’re referencing is from a hypothetical statement I made way up thread that said if the US suddenly became a war torn third world nation I personally would not expect Canada to open her borders and just let people in because I don’t consider myself their problem?

Ryan, I am an active duty military officer. I don’t believe what you’re saying I do. My career sort of hangs on me NOT believing it.

 

[RyanBlack]

No, I did not

Yes, you did. You wrote:

“No, Canada doesn’t have a moral obligation under Catholic teaching, because they have nothing to do with the Church. They are a sovereign nation that can act according to the needs of their own citizens.”

 

[Pup7]

I’m done here.

Canada does not have ANY OBLIGATION under CATHOLIC TEACHINGS because they are NOT governed/ruled/managed/overseen by the Catholic Church. You’re completely misinterpreting what I’ve said by saying that. They are not under the law of the RCC. They could close their borders tomorrow if they wanted. That is 100% true!

They have treaty obligations and a human obligation - but not because the RCC says so.

I cannot believe this all started because of a hypothetical statement that I’m now being pilloried for. Holy Hannah.

And I did not deny that nations have an obligation to help. I said they have no obligation to the Catholic Church. Canada is not a Catholic.

 

[RyanBlack]

Ryan, I am an active duty military officer. I don’t believe what you’re saying I do. My career sort of hangs on me NOT believing it.

I don’t know what you believe, and don’t make assumptions. I was simply responding to where you actually did write that Canada has no moral obligation. According to Church teaching, that is quite simply incorrect.

Again, I’m not making any assumptions as to what you think or believe about immigrants and refugees, and charity towards them.

 

[RyanBlack]

Canada does not have ANY OBLIGATION under CATHOLIC TEACHINGS because they are NOT governed/ruled/managed/overseen by the Catholic Church.

That’s not how Church teaching works, otherwise CCC 2241 is rendered meaningless in stating that nations have an obligation, since no nation other than Vatican City is governed by the Church.

 

[Pup7]

I was simply responding to where you actually did write that Canada has no moral obligation. According to Church teaching, that is quite simply incorrect.

That is not what I said.

This is what I said:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

I’ve said this:

No, Canada doesn’t have a moral obligation under Catholic teaching, because they have nothing to do with the Church. They are a sovereign nation that can act according to the needs of their own citizens. They are under no actual legal obligation to do a thing. Would they? Possibly - but if they didn’t they wouldn’t be wrong.

You are completely not understanding what I’ve said, dropping words from phrases, and twisting what I’ve written. I have repeatedly said “not under Catholic teaching”.

Canada is not a Catholic. They have obligations that have nothing to do with what the RCC says or what we believe.