Pope Francis donates $500,000 to migrants at US border

[13pollitos]

God commands love of your neighbor

I fully agree as should all Christians. But what does loving your neighbor look like?

 

[maryjk]

Yes, but if we didn’t send money we would be accused of not loving our neighbor.

 

[13pollitos]

Unfortunately I think you are right.

ETA:

I seriously believe this is the central conflict I am having with the money from Pope Francis. I can not wrap my mind around the idea of money being the sign of love and support. In Latin American countries money equals power, which in turn places a price on the heads of those that possess the money. Handing over that amount to a church that is already in extreme danger seems wrong to me.

 

[billsherman]

But what does loving your neighbor look like?

It means accepting them. It means providing for their needs. It means recognizing their fundamental humanity. It means doing what you think you can’t or shouldn’t do for them.

It means instead of condemning asylum seekers, working with them to make their lives easier. It means demanding that people stop demonizing migrants. It means giving of whatever excess you have (be it money, things, food, times, expertise, etc.) to make their life easier in some way.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. If loving your neighbor is easy, you’re doing it wrong.

God commands love without condition. It is not our job to figure out where that love ends.

 

[maryjk]

Unfortunately I think you are right.

We are truly in a no win situation.

We send money, it doesn’t go to those that need it. We don’t send money, we are evil and not loving of our neighbor.

We close our borders and again we are evil and not loving of our neighbor. We open them, and we allow not only those in need in, but also gang members and criminals into our midst.

We stop “families” from coming in, separate the adults from the children and we are ripping children from their parents. If we don’t, we are actually encouraging human trafficking because some of those children do not have family with them. They were either sold or kidnapped so the group looked like a family.

There is no winning

 

[13pollitos]

You are bringing up many good points. Loving our neighbor should not be easy. Many of the ways you mention are exactly right. If you give whatever excesses you have though, eventually you are the one that is in need of help. Who do you turn to once that happens?

Do we discount the humanity of others that are having to deal with issues created by migration in order to recognize the humanity of migrants? Is seeking a safer path denying their humanity?

Some times our loving God gives us the answer of no. Do we as humans have the right to also answer no at times? I do not think we should ever do what we believe we shouldn’t.

 

[13pollitos]

I agree. We need to step back and view the real humans that are caught up in this instead of the talking points that extremists are shouting.

 

[abucs]

You should bend your politics to obey Jesus’ will, not bend Jesus’ will to obey your politics. Love your neighbor, without qualification. That’s what Jesus did.

You are trying to love your neighbour through the force of the state.

Worse than that you are forcing your real neighbour to obey your false dictations of love through the force of the state.

As you said, Jesus ignored politics.

You are not. Your very demands are wrapped up in the power of the state and the taking of others wealth and culture through forced state power.

Shame on you. This is not Jesus.

 

[billsherman]

You are trying to love your neighbour through the force of the state.

That is a strange interpretation of what I wrote. Like your belief that Pope Francis is doing the work of demons, you are incorrect here as well.

I understand that you wish Jesus said, “Love your neighbor under the conditions that your preferred political party allows,” instead of what he actually said, “love your neighbor.” One is easy, the other is hard. Really, really, hard. I get that, but I have far more respect for people who try and fail than those who throw up their hands and say “It’s too hard, it won’t matter anyway, so I just won’t do anything.”

 

[blackforest]

We send money, it doesn’t go to those that need it.

Do you know that the Pence Funds aren’t reaching the people? My understanding - correct me if I’m wrong - is that it’s going into the bank accounts of either the Diocese or individual parishes.

We don’t send money, we are evil and not loving of our neighbor.

I don’t think anyone here said that. Some people prefer volunteer work or sending in-kind donations, such as blankets and clothing. Other people pray Rosaries or other appropriate prayers for immigrants and asylees. All of these are valid ways to follow our faith and show our love to the Least of These.

It might help to change how you frame the issue. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/...-border-emergency-is-not-what-you-think-81610

We close our borders and again we are evil and not loving of our neighbor. We open them, and we allow not only those in need in, but also gang members and criminals into our midst.

Are those our only choices?

We stop “families” from coming in, separate the adults from the children and we are ripping children from their parents. If we don’t, we are actually encouraging human trafficking because some of those children do not have family with them. They were either sold or kidnapped so the group looked like a family.

Children suspected of being trafficked have always been pulled away for questioning and investigation. What has been called into question was the routine, long-term separation of every single family “just in case” children were being trafficked. Should that logic apply at every border crossing for every traveler everywhere in the world? Most traffickers are coming in legally through official ports of entry.

 

[abucs]

That is a strange interpretation of what I wrote. Like your belief that Pope Francis is doing the work of demons, you are incorrect here as well.

I understand that you wish Jesus said, “Love your neighbor under the conditions that your preferred political party allows,” instead of what he actually said, “love your neighbor.” One is easy, the other is hard. Really, really, hard. I get that, but I have far more respect for people who try and fail than those who throw up their hands and say “It’s too hard, it won’t matter anyway, so I just won’t do anything.”

Do you understand the mental brainwashing that is needed to not engage with what people say but imagine a certain thing and then argue against it as if I said it.

That belies a totalitarian mindset as does your force of your own morals through the state.

Your religion in the context we are discussing necessarily involves the appropriation of state power.

Like a lot of people who make a similar appeal you are forcing your views through the power of the state.

This is the very opposite of Jesus.

If you want to help certain people then go and help them. We all help people.

We don’t all try and force our own morals on people through power of the state. This is what you are doing.

Your morals are wrong and your acceptance of forced state power to enforce that morality s worse.

 

[13pollitos]

Would it be wrong in your line of thinking for the US to change the immigration system to allow for an easier and safer passage for asylum seekers? If the government allowed for asylum seekers to apply for and be flown to the US from Central America in larger numbers (or for expanded list of reasons), would that be acceptable?

 

[billsherman]

Your morals are wrong and your acceptance of forced state power to enforce that morality s worse.

I really don’t see how my morality has anything to do with the state. In fact, if you look over my posts on this topic, I believe I have been pretty clear in calling people out for subverting their Christianity to their political party.

Jesus wasn’t talking about state power, and neither am I. I am talking about how to properly follow Jesus, you need to conform your politics to his commands to love your neighbor, welcome the stranger, and turn the other cheek. I honestly have no idea how you interpret this as:

That belies a totalitarian mindset as does your force of your own morals through the state.

Your religion in the context we are discussing necessarily involves the appropriation of state power.

Like a lot of people who make a similar appeal you are forcing your views through the power of the state.

Maybe you can explain my moral failures in a way I can better understand. But I am apparently also mentally brainwashed, so I may never understand as well as you do.

 

[abucs]

Would it be wrong in your line of thinking for the US to change the immigration system to allow for an easier and safer passage for asylum seekers? If the government allowed for asylum seekers to apply for and be flown to the US from Central America in larger numbers (or for expanded list of reasons), would that be acceptable?

The asylum laws are being abused. We all know people are given a set standard universal statement to make when applying for asylum. This is supporting deception. That is not Jesus.

We all know the political efforts to hear this pre set standard claim and keep these people in the country so that the legal system can be delayed so long that it never catches itself and then people just argue that another mass amnesty is what is needed. This is deception. This is not Jesus.

The United States should look to withdraw from United Nations agreements on refugees. The process is clearly being abused by one side of politics by deception for political ideologies. This is not Jesus.

It would be unjust to force through the state the stealing of hard working American tax payers money to fly people on mass from countries around the world just because they repeat a standard text for asylum trying their luck at American tax payers expense. That is completely disrespectful and should not be acceptable to anyone who values justice.

 

[13pollitos]

I do agree the system is being abused. Reforming the way we do things needs to happen and quicker rather than later. But my question is, would reforming the system to allow for safer passage be acceptable?

ETA: I am not asking for taxpayers to fly asylum seekers to the US, or even for tax payers to pay for people who are already granted asylum here. I am asking if a system that allows for people to receive permission to fly or some other way arrive to the US

 

[abucs]

Maybe you can explain my moral failures in a way I can better understand. But I am apparently also mentally brainwashed, so I may never understand as well as you do.

The brain washing is as what was explained. You clearly imagined I would wish to say a certain thing that i did not and then you argue as if I said that thing. That is a way of not engaging with what was said. It is a failure to understand what was said because one holds a narrow and shallow view without proper understanding but held together with an emotionalised morality.

Mass illegal migration is facilitated by state power. You have international agreements by the state You have legal processes for their acceptance managed by the state. You have border and medical institutions funded by the state. You have political power making and shaping laws that is funded by the state. You have budgets which pay for everything from education to food stamps facilitated by the state. You have 25% of prison inmates who are illegal aliens paid for by the state and the crime by that specific group both before and after prison who needs to be opposed by state forces. This group especially in the American context is changing the face of the indigenous political culture. It is an attack on that culture.

Mass migration is facilitated by state power. Mass migration is also deliberate;y changing the face of the indigenous political culture. It is an attack on that culture.

People whose morals are used to underpin this injustice are people whose morals are an attack on that culture by use of force of the state and getting other people to pay in accordance to those morals.

It is not simply people acting on their own morals but people who necessarily have to have the state underwrite their morals paid for by other people.

 

[13pollitos]

I am talking about how to properly follow Jesus, you need to conform your politics to his commands to love your neighbor, welcome the stranger, and turn the other cheek.

I agree that we need to love our neighbor, welcome the stranger, turn the other cheek. What I am trying to understand is the proper way to do that. It seems very wrong that people are accusing each other of not loving their fellow man just because there isn’t 100% full agreement on all opinions.

 

[abucs]

I do agree the system is being abused. Reforming the way we do things needs to happen and quicker rather than later. But my question is, would reforming the system to allow for safer passage be acceptable?

ETA: I am not asking for taxpayers to fly asylum seekers to the US, or even for tax payers to pay for people who are already granted asylum here. I am asking if a system that allows for people to receive permission to fly or some other way arrive to the US

There are already processes that act in exactly this way. There are millions of people in refugee camps around the world who have their claims assessed on the ground and if accepted are then flown to countries who have agreed to take them.

Whether it is acceptable or not is dependent on the numbers countries decide to accept. The underlying problems can never be solved by this process.

I have my own ideas on this process, but it is happening now.

Those that jump the queue facilitated by political parties are something in addition to this existing process.

 

[billsherman]

It is not simply people acting on their own morals but people who necessarily have to have the state underwrite their morals paid for by other people.

I think, and I am clearly brainwashed so I might be wrong, that you are saying that helping migrants is supporting state power to do immoral things. If you are in fact saying that, you can’t possibly be more wrong in your interpretation of Jesus’ message. The Church is extremely clear that caring for migrants is a moral necessity.

You are free to reject this, as you appear to, but by doing so you also reject Jesus. Jesus stands with migrants, not people telling them to “go home” on our side of the border.

Again: Jesus’ command to love your neighbor comes without condition. It is wrong to place any conditions on the command. Political parties do it every day, and they are morally wrong every day.

Every time you draw a line and place someone else on the other side (rich v. poor, citizen v. migrant, white v. black, etc.), Jesus is on the other side of the line. He is with those less fortunate, not over here with us.

 

[billsherman]

I agree that we need to love our neighbor, welcome the stranger, turn the other cheek. What I am trying to understand is the proper way to do that. It seems very wrong that people are accusing each other of not loving their fellow man just because there isn’t 100% full agreement on all opinions.

Fair enough. But you need to start with actually loving and welcoming them. There is precious little of that going on in this forum. All excuses have to be dropped. Then you can begin.

Then proceed by giving from what excess you have. My wife and I happen to have extra money and an extra bedroom, so we took in a migrant as a foster child. Not everyone can do that, obviously. Some can give smaller amounts of money, others can give time - we have a friend who is an immigration attorney who does some pro bono work for migrants. And others advocate for migrant rights.

The ways to show love for the stranger are limited only by your imagination, and many of them cost nothing but effort.

What never shows love: claiming they are committing fraud, claiming they are criminals, telling them to go somewhere else, claiming there is nothing you can do, claiming they are stealing money from Americans just by being here, claiming they just need to “do it the right way,” claiming that the Pope is doing the work of demons by donating for their needs, etc.