The Border, Immigration, Multiculturalism, and Assimilation

[RobbyS]

Er… I have bad news for you. Unless you are a descendant of one of the indigenous peoples of North America, then you are not an American. You are, by your own reporting, Irish/Italnian. Just the fact that you were born here doesn’t magically change your ethnicity. You are still Irish/Italian. So I hope that you plan to build that fence with you on the outside, because you don’t have any more right to be here than any other immigrant.

Signed,

The Proud Anglo-Celt living in America

Your post is just as extreme and #1. The historical fact is that the United States benefited greatly from the pause in unlimited immigration between 1920 and 1965. A multiethnic society is very difficult to sustain,as the example of the Austro-Hungarian Empire demonstrates, as the recent history of the former Yugoslavia shows, as the present difficulties in Iraq also show. Furthermore, the reason for unlimited immigration is primarily to obtain cheap labor, so inevitably exploitation of the immigrants results. A futher kind of explotation is that of the tax papyer, since in a welfare state the unscrupulous employer is able to pay less because the public picks up much of the expense of providing for the needs of the workers. Apart from that, the social confusiuon that is caused by a too rapid influx of foreigners can be seen in the way that neighborhoods are transformed as their social cohesion disappears.

 

[JReducation]

Why shouldn’t I think being an American is more important?

Which background should I be more proud of? Which background should my children be more proud of? It may be easy for someone whose parents or grandparents are recent immigrants, but I don’t see your point. What is my ethnicity? Should I call myself Native American because my Great-Great-Grandmother was Sioux? Should my kids say they are Germans because my Grandmother was German…even though my eldest looks more Filipino than anything else? Or should he call himself a Filipino-American and deny over half of his ancestory? My kids would feel just as much at home in the Philippines as I would.

I see your point. I’m not sure that American is an ethnic group; however, what you’re describing is what I call integration.

I’m a Hispanic Jew. Although I became a Catholic almost five years ago, I still consider myself Jewish. This was the culture that I grew up with (foods, language, celebrations etc). My wife was British (deceased). My daughter was born in VA and my son in Italy.

My kids identify themselves with the culture with which they feel most comfortable. Both of them identify themselves as British Americans. Even though their mom died when they were very young, they lived in the UK for many years after she died. My daughter left the USA when she was five and returned at age 17. My son never lived here until he was 12. He’s now 18. He was born in Italy and went to the UK. Both are US citizens and are considered natural born Americans, my daughter because she was born in VA and my son because of Dad. He’s not a naturalized citizen.

I guess the point is that ethnicity is not only a matter of heritage, but also a matter of identification. Does that make sense?

 

[Pong]

Which background should I be more proud of?

Sir, I assure you that I couldn’t care less which ethinicity you chose to identify yourself by. I only ask that you let me identify myself by mine.

RobbyS- Please show me where I stated that I was in favor of unlimited immigration.

 

[JReducation]

Does anyone beside me feel that we have gotten off the original thread?

The original poster wants to deport every illegal immigrant, build a fence, eliminate ethnic labels and make English the official language of the USA. How does this make us a more Christian country?

He ends his post by asking if the Church has an official position on multiculturalism.

This is the official position of the Church when speaking of social inequalities. If we examine it closely, we can gleam the Church’s position on multiculturalism.

413. How are we to view social inequalities? 1936-1938, 1946-1947 (CCC)

"There are sinful social and economic inequalities which affect millions of human beings. These inequalities are in open contradiction to the Gospel and are contrary to justice, to the dignity of persons, and to peace. There are, however, differences among people caused by various factors which enter into the plan of God. Indeed,

God wills that each might receive what he or she needs from others and that those endowed with particular talents should share them with others. Such differences encourage and often oblige people to the practice of generosity, kindness and the sharing of goods. They also foster the mutual enrichment of cultures."

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html#The%20Human%20Community

As we can see, the Church teaches that we must share what we have; that those who have less have a God-given right to receive what they need from those who have been gifted; that difference among cultures (multiculturalism) is enriching. It’s up to us to prove that the Church is wrong.

Like this, there are many more statements that the Church has made on immigration and national borders. They’re all rooted on justice, not political expediency or economic benefit.

Let’s look at some of our great American saints to understand how we should respond to these situations.

St. Francis Xavier Cabrini came to the USA to serve Italian immigrants. The American Church invited her and her sisters to come because they knew the language and understood the culture.

St. John Neuman of Philadelphia was brought here to serve the Eastern European immigrants in their language. When he became Bishop of Philadelphia he brought sisters from Belgium, Sisters, Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary to serve the Belgian immigrants. He also founded the American Franciscan Sisters to work among the English speaking Catholics. He broadened his outreach rather than force the immigrants to conform.

St. Katherine Drexel, the heiress to the Drexal millions, founded the Franciscan Sisters of the Sacred Heart and put her entire fortune into building hospitals, schools and other needed organizations for the Native Americans and the African Americans. The Sisters had to learn the language of tne Natives and the customs of the Black community.

Mother Teresa (OK, she’s not an American) but she wrote into her constitutions that the Missionaries of Charity must welcome each person as he is: Christian, Hindu, Muslim, regardless of their national origin or their legal status. The only voice that we should hear in meeting a poor person is Christ’s voice who says, “I thirst.”

Welcoming the immigrant and those who are different is part of our Catholic tradition. We have to preserve this.

Obviously, we have to protect our families and chldren from real harm, not imagined harm. To keep it real, we have to realize that harm can come in many ways and from many sources, not just from across the border.

The fact that we do not have enough teachers in this country and that our society does little to promote teaching as a career option for our young is going to harm us in the long run. An uneducated society is its worse enemy. How are we dealiing with this danger?

We want to send immigrants packing across the border, but we allow our youth to grow up with a sense of entitlement without responsibility. There is a serious moral problem here. The poor have no right to our assistance, but our youth have the right to run their schools and often their homes without impunity and without a sense of duty to family and society. Isn’t this also a moral wrong that has to be corrected?

What made the above referenced saints effective was their respect for the dignity of the poor and those who are diffeent while at the same time they worked to correct the evils in society.

We must look at issues from the vantage point of Catholic tradition, both in the USA and around the world.

 

[rlg94086]

I see your point. I’m not sure that American is an ethnic group; however, what you’re describing is what I call integration.

I’m a Hispanic Jew. Although I became a Catholic almost five years ago, I still consider myself Jewish. This was the culture that I grew up with (foods, language, celebrations etc). My wife was British (deceased). My daughter was born in VA and my son in Italy.

My kids identify themselves with the culture with which they feel most comfortable. Both of them identify themselves as British Americans. Even though their mom died when they were very young, they lived in the UK for many years after she died. My daughter left the USA when she was five and returned at age 17. My son never lived here until he was 12. He’s now 18. He was born in Italy and went to the UK. Both are US citizens and are considered natural born Americans, my daughter because she was born in VA and my son because of Dad. He’s not a naturalized citizen.

I guess the point is that ethnicity is not only a matter of heritage, but also a matter of identification. Does that make sense?

Sort of. I’m not saying American is an ethnicity as in race. It is a nationality and cultural heritage. Most of the time people discuss ethnicity is your racial background, but that is not the only meaning (please see below from Webster). I am mixed, though mostly Anglo-Saxon. My wife is Asian-Pacific Islander. My kids are mixed. What we all have in common is our shared experiences growing up in America. Sure, my wife’s is slightly different because her parents immigrated from the Philippines, but she is still very American. I brought up the idea of retiring there, but she won’t have any of that! America and apple pie, thank you very much! Okay…with trips to Europe because it is a great place to visit.

**

ethnic

**

Main Entry: 1eth·nic merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif Pronunciation: \ˈeth-nik\ Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin ethnicus, from Greek ethnikos national, gentile, from ethnos nation, people; akin to Greek ēthos custom — more at sib Date: 15th century 1**:** heathen
2 a**:** of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background <ethnic minorities> <ethnic enclaves> b: being a member of a specified ethnic group <an ethnic German> c:** of, relating to, or characteristic of ethnics <ethnic neighborhoods> <ethnic foods>

So, call it ethnicity, heritage, cultural identity, whatever…we are Americans. Are racial ethnicity is mixed, so that really doesn’t matter much.

 

[rlg94086]

Sir, I assure you that I couldn’t care less which ethinicity you chose to identify yourself by. I only ask that you let me identify myself by mine.

When…in any of my posts…did I say that I give a rip about how you identify yourself. I said I thought it was sad, but I didn’t say I wouldn’t let you do it.

 

[Pong]

rlg- You asked me how you should identify yourself. I responded by telling you that I don’t really care. If you want to create some sort of “American identity” for yourself, then that is your perrogative.

But as to the issue at hand, no one who descends from any of the European nations has any right to claim America as his or her own exclusively simply for being born here as Roman Crusader claims.

 

[pnewton]

It is no secret that political corruption reigns in many developing nations. It’s almost a way of life. However, what many Christians in the USA are never told is about the good people who are crushed under the wheels of oppressive regimes often supported by the government of the USA and by Corporate America.

Excellent post. I appreciate your thoughts on the subject. The US has often been guilty of, whether deliberately of not, of causing much of the evil south of the border. We want to excercise power in the Western Hemisphere on one hand, but deny any responsibility for misuse of that power when, pardon the expression, things go south.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Does anyone beside me feel that we have gotten off the original thread?

The original poster wants to deport every illegal immigrant, build a fence, eliminate ethnic labels and make English the official language of the USA. How does this make us a more Christian country?

He ends his post by asking if the Church has an official position on multiculturalism.

This is the official position of the Church when speaking of social inequalities. If we examine it closely, we can gleam the Church’s position on multiculturalism.

413. How are we to view social inequalities? 1936-1938, 1946-1947 (CCC)

"There are sinful social and economic inequalities which affect millions of human beings. These inequalities are in open contradiction to the Gospel and are contrary to justice, to the dignity of persons, and to peace. There are, however, differences among people caused by various factors which enter into the plan of God. Indeed,

God wills that each might receive what he or she needs from others and that those endowed with particular talents should share them with others. Such differences encourage and often oblige people to the practice of generosity, kindness and the sharing of goods. They also foster the mutual enrichment of cultures."

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html#The%20Human%20Community

As we can see, the Church teaches that we must share what we have; that those who have less have a God-given right to receive what they need from those who have been gifted; that difference among cultures (multiculturalism) is enriching. It’s up to us to prove that the Church is wrong.

Like this, there are many more statements that the Church has made on immigration and national borders. They’re all rooted on justice, not political expediency or economic benefit.

Let’s look at some of our great American saints to understand how we should respond to these situations.

St. Francis Xavier Cabrini came to the USA to serve Italian immigrants. The American Church invited her and her sisters to come because they knew the language and understood the culture.

St. John Neuman of Philadelphia was brought here to serve the Eastern European immigrants in their language. When he became Bishop of Philadelphia he brought sisters from Belgium, Sisters, Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary to serve the Belgian immigrants. He also founded the American Franciscan Sisters to work among the English speaking Catholics. He broadened his outreach rather than force the immigrants to conform.

St. Katherine Drexel, the heiress to the Drexal millions, founded the Franciscan Sisters of the Sacred Heart and put her entire fortune into building hospitals, schools and other needed organizations for the Native Americans and the African Americans. The Sisters had to learn the language of tne Natives and the customs of the Black community.

Mother Teresa (OK, she’s not an American) but she wrote into her constitutions that the Missionaries of Charity must welcome each person as he is: Christian, Hindu, Muslim, regardless of their national origin or their legal status. The only voice that we should hear in meeting a poor person is Christ’s voice who says, “I thirst.”

Welcoming the immigrant and those who are different is part of our Catholic tradition. We have to preserve this.

Obviously, we have to protect our families and chldren from real harm, not imagined harm. To keep it real, we have to realize that harm can come in many ways and from many sources, not just from across the border.

The fact that we do not have enough teachers in this country and that our society does little to promote teaching as a career option for our young is going to harm us in the long run. An uneducated society is its worse enemy. How are we dealiing with this danger?

We want to send immigrants packing across the border, but we allow our youth to grow up with a sense of entitlement without responsibility. There is a serious moral problem here. The poor have no right to our assistance, but our youth have the right to run their schools and often their homes without impunity and without a sense of duty to family and society. Isn’t this also a moral wrong that has to be corrected?

What made the above referenced saints effective was their respect for the dignity of the poor and those who are diffeent while at the same time they worked to correct the evils in society.

We must look at issues from the vantage point of Catholic tradition, both in the USA and around the world.

I agree. Unfortunately, there are too many people who have bought into this America-first ideology that is contrary to the First Commandment.

 

[JReducation]

I’m sorry if I keep harping on the same thing, but this is a topic near and dear to my heart. As I said in a previous post, my father was in Foreign Service and we saw a great deal of misery and injustice. Later, I went to South America as a missionary and saw more.

I see the legitimate concerns regarding immigration: safety, lawfulness and international cooperation to relieve the suffering that drives people from their homeland.

That being said, I encourage every Catholic to remember that we are, as St. Vincent de Paul said, “Children of the Church” first, before citizens of a nation. When the two are in conflict, the Church must win out. Otherwise, we are duplicating what the English did: God, King and Church in that order. Sometimes, I’m not so sure if God is still in the equation.

I found these citations in the Catechism that speak to this issue. I thought I’d share them.

2446 St. John Chrysostom vigorously recalls this: "Not to enable the poor to share in our goods is to steal from them and deprive them of life. The goods we possess are not ours, but theirs."239 “The demands of justice must be satisfied first of all; that which is already due in justice is not to be offered as a gift of charity”:240
When we attend to the needs of those in want, we give them what is theirs, not ours. More than performing works of mercy, we are paying a debt of justice.

This is a very different perspective from that of many Americans when speaking about the immigrant poor, legal or illegal.

2439 Rich nations have a grave moral responsibility toward those which are unable to ensure the means of their development by themselves or have been prevented from doing so by tragic historical events. It is a duty in solidarity and charity; it is also an obligation in justice if the prosperity of the rich nations has come from resources that have not been paid for fairly.

It is no secret that the wealthiest power brokers in our country have often made the fortune off the backs of the working poor, both in the USA and abroad.

**2241 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. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.

Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.**

“To the extent we are able.” Every American knows that we waste resources, individually and collectively.

Immigrants also have an obligation to reciprocate with respect, gratitude and lawful behavior.

I believe that the Church’s view is very balanced, much more than politicians. We have to be very careful that we do not replace our Catholic tradition with political rhetoric.

JR

 

[KathleenElsie]

When people refer to themselves as German-Americans or Spanish-Americans or whatever-Americans it bothers me somewhat. What we consider ourselves and its value to us is how we tend to tell people about ourselves. So for this, to me, it tends to put the ethnic background in the dominate place.

On the other hand when it is stated that a person is a Catholic American, Jewish American or whatever religious affiliation-American that tends to show me that they place God before country as most of us would do.

So then I am a Catholic American of Swiss descent. After this description I would put my status and other titles in order of importance.

 

[JReducation]

I realize that this is a deviation from the OP and I apologize to the original poster for straying off topic for a moment. As I look at the discussion about ethnicity and nationality, I am forced to ask myself why this is so important. I’m speaking only from my experience.

I grew up and still live in a multicultural, multilingual and multinational family. My father’s family is of Hispanic origin. They arrived in the 1890s to avoid the Spanish-American war. My mother’s family is Eastern-European Jew. They arrived in the 1940s. I married a girl from Bath, England UK. My daughter and I were born in VA, but my son was born in Italy. That’s just my household. Then there are the cousins and my brothers and their kids, etc.

As I posted before, I grew up with the State Dept where my father worked, so I lived in different countries, much like a military brat. Eventually, as an adult, my own job has taken me to different countries. That’s how my son was born in Italy. The same week that he was born we registered him at the US and UK embassies. The same with my daughter when she was born in VA, we registered her in VA and at the UK Consulate General. They are young adults now, but they are what the Dept of State calls Dual Nationals. This is not the same as naturalized citizens. This means that they are natural born American and natural born British citizens. Neither country has jurisdiction to take away the other’s citizenship. Also, the USA’s regulations say that if a country awards citizenship to an American, for whatever reason, as long as the American has no intent to surrender his or her US citizenship, the person may have both.

The way that we do it in my house is simple. When my kids are in the USA they are Americans and when they are in the UK, they are British. They can live, work, study and vote in both countries. They also have to pay taxes in the country of residence, but so does everyone else.

While we travelled no one really paid any attention to our ancestry. The question was always what’s your citizenship? We lived in South America for three years. We entered as American citizens. The fact that I have a Hispanic last name didn’t make me Hispanic in their eyes. We were Americans. As we travelled around I met many South Americans with German, Jewish, Asian, Italian, French, English and of course Portuguese and Spanish last names. But they do not divide themselves into ethnic groups. They classify themselves by race: Caucasian, Mestizo, Mulato, Black, Native American and Mongol (Asians). Venezuela, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and Brazil have very large Caucasian populations.

We have all seen the ethnic conflicts in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and China. But in those countries ethnicity is often tied into religion, clans and most important conquests. Our situation is different from those countries. I fail to see why we should compete for dominance. For me, living in a multicultural and multilingual family is exciting. People still get a big chuckle in our house when my son gets angry and starts to argue in Italian, his sister answers in her British English and I tell them to be quiet in Spanish. The interesting part is that no one misses a cue.

I believe that this is the future of the American family. There are going to be more and more multicultural and multilingual families. I work with young people. They’re always asking me how to say something in Spanish, German, Italian or French. The young want to expand their horizons, probably more than the Boomer generation.

 

[RomanCrusader]

So, they are German-Dutch-Filipino-Anglo-Chinese-Irish-Scottish-Spanish-Etc-Native-Americans. Got it. I don’t know how you fit that on a form though.

Ethnicity is not important in my life. Nationality is more important to me. You can call yourself whatever you want, but we are Americans - anyone, born or nationalized. I’m not any more or less American than someone whose parents immigrated here from Mexico, China or India. I think it is sad that you feel hyphenations are important.

Agreed. The only people who obsess over ethnicity are white supremacists.

Nationality is far more important than ethnicity.

 

[KathleenElsie]

When people refer to themselves as German-Americans or Spanish-Americans or whatever-Americans it bothers me somewhat. What we consider ourselves and its value to us is how we tend to tell people about ourselves. So for this, to me, it tends to put the ethnic background in the dominate place.

On the other hand when it is stated that a person is a Catholic American, Jewish American or whatever religious affiliation-American that tends to show me that they place God before country as most of us would do.

So then I am a Catholic American of Swiss descent. After this description I would put my status and other titles in order of importance.

 

[FLCathMom]

But as to the issue at hand, no one who descends from any of the European nations has any right to claim America as his or her own exclusively simply for being born here as Roman Crusader claims.

The term “American” is an abbreviation of “United States of American”- we are not claiming to be of the native population, but of this culture- the distinct culture of the USA. You know… apple pie, baseball, Uncle Sam. “United States of American” is a bit much to say, though.

 

[JReducation]

The term “American” is an abbreviation of “United States of American”- we are not claiming to be of the native population, but of this culture- the distinct culture of the USA. You know… apple pie, baseball, Uncle Sam. “United States of American” is a bit much to say, though.

I believe that you’re right on that score. Prior to our war for independence, the Europeans refered to the New World as the Americas. I believe that it was the British that first referred to us as Americans. Someone correct me if I’m wrong.

That’s becasue English does not have an adjective form for United States. In other language, such as Spanish, Italian and French, there is such a term as United Stater and that’s how they refer to us when they want to separate the people of the USA from the rest of the American hemisphere.

What is interesting is that they do not look at us as Europeans, Asians or Latin American. That’s a fairly new concept.

When you travel to Europe to visit your Irish or Italian relatives, they often refer to you as their American relations. They consider you part of the family, but not a national. I believe the reason for this is that we are different.

Contrary to what the original post says, after a generation in a new country, you are different from the original immigrants, even if you preserve certain customs and language. The former British colonies are different from the UK.

I wouldn’t call it assimilation nor would I want assimilation. I would call it cultural evolution or integration. Assimilation has a dangerous weakness which lends itself to violation of human rights. When you assimilate you are absorbed.

Biologically, this is a natural phenomena. Bu sociologically this can often be another form of bigotry. It often requires that a social system identify one cultural paradigm as superior to all others. This is what they tried to do in the old Soviet Union and it didn’t work. After the USSR collapsed, its people were still who they were. That’s how you got all this little countries. People had resisted for 50 years. They played the game, but they hated the dominant Russian culture.

Russian culture has many beautiful things to recommend it, but the imposition on the monorities that were “absorbed” into the Soviet Union made it distasteful to them.

On the other hand, you have nations like Spain where there is a great deal of cultural diversity and where several languages are still spoken, their citizens are happier. They have problems, but what country does not have problems. In nations like Spain, Switzerland, Argentina and several others where differences are accepted what has happened is that people spend their energy grappling with issues that affect everyone, such as economic prosperity, healthcare, finding their place in the global marketplace.

It is also true that the immigrants have helped by attempting to learn the dominant language and I believe that this is important. We saw this in India where they have hundreds of languages. They had to settle for two national languages, Hindi and English. But they did not extinguish their other languages. This is integration, not assimilation.

It’s also important to remember that the United States has marketed itself as the most powerful and wealthiest nation on Earth. It’s like the blue-light special at K-Mart. Let’s not blame the poor of this world for wanting to be here. We have not been honest with our people and told them the truth about how deep in debt we are with the Chinese or how our nuclear weapons are virtually useless, because if we dare use them, someone is going to shoot another back at us. Basically, we have a military stalemate.

Finally, our government fails to tell our people that we are no longer self-sufficient. We are part of a world market economy, whether we like it or not. Like many other great empires, we have done some unsavory things in other countries to get control of their natural resources. We’re not the first empire or the last to do this. I’m not playing the blame game.

What I am saying is that it’s time that we come clean with where we stand economically, militarily and politically. As long as we portray ourselves as the haven of the world, we’re going to attract the poor.

On the other hand, if we truly are the haven of the world, we have a moral obligation to extend our hand to Christ in the distressing disguise ofthe poor.

We can’t have it both ways, if we are to be faithful to the Gospel. Either we have enough to share with the poor and we do so or we come clean and we acknowlege that we don’t have.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

That’s becasue English does not have an adjective form for United States. In other language, such as Spanish, Italian and French, there is such a term as United Stater and that’s how they refer to us when they want to separate the people of the USA from the rest of the American hemisphere.

Living in LA, I know a lot of Mexicans and they generally refer to us as “Norteamericanos” and another word that means what you said (I forget the word off hand).

I wouldn’t call it assimilation nor would I want assimilation. I would call it cultural evolution or integration. Assimilation has a dangerous weakness which lends itself to violation of human rights. When you assimilate you are absorbed.

When I hear fellow Americans speak of assimilated, I can’t help but think of scary beings wearing cybernetic implants, black leather and pale white skin:

“We are the Borg, you will be assimilated. Resistance is futile. We will add you biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us.”

Therefore, I prefer the term acculturation.

 

[JReducation]

Living in LA, I know a lot of Mexicans and they generally refer to us as “Norteamericanos” and another word that means what you said (I forget the word off hand).

In Spanish the term is estadounidense (es-ta-doe-uni-den-say)

“We are the Borg, you will be assimilated. Resistance is futile. We will add you biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us.”

I get the same image. You know where Rodenberry got that image from right? The Nazis.

Therefore, I prefer the term acculturation.

I like aculturation, because it has more flexibility. As people from different social contexts converge, they gradually learn from each other and both sides benefit. Aculturation comes from an ancient Latin word that means to cultivate (Cultura). Think of agriculture. Just as you cultivate the land, you also cultivate social development and change. How do we do this? We do this by sharing our gifts.

Isn’t this what Christianity is about? When I hear Catholics go on the illegal immigration campaign it reminds me of the battles that the early church faced regarding the arrival of the Gentiles. They were discriminated against because they were had not complied with the Jewish law of circumsicion. If the Church had held on to that way of thinking, most of us would not be Christians.

We’re not promoting lawlessness. We are promoting Christianity. Even in Christianity there is room for flexibility. I think that Paul argued that well.

 

[Pong]

“United States of American” is a bit much to say, though.

Then why not use the proper term: United States of America…

 

[ana0j_11]

My view is that we should deport all illegal aliens (or as many as we can), build a border fence, punish employers of illegals, and put the national guard on the border. Of course in the deportation process we should take care not to break up families and perhaps certain arrangements could be worked out, but overall the vast, vast majority of illegals would be required to return to their homeland.

Next we would make english the official language of the US. That much is long overdue. We would also put a temporary (around 5-10 years) reduction on legal immigration. Why? Because so many immigrants have yet to assimilate. A “multicultural society” is going to be the end of this nation. We are supposed to be a melting pot, taking people of all backgrounds and creating a new people, the Americans. Though I am of Irish/Italian heritage, I do not label myself as such. I consider myself American, plain and simple. Right now we have ethnic enclaves where immigrants are not willing to become part of our country, and we also have certain natives who are not willing to accept them as American ever. Both of these kinds of people must change.

We need to stop having “African American”, “Mexican American”, “Chinese American”, “Russian American”, “French American”, etc. Just American, plain and simple. A “multicultural society” is a house divided, and it will eventually collapse.

If you live in this country, be an American. If you want to be a foreigner, then go back to Europe, Asia, Africa, Arabia, Latin America, or wherever you come from.

Does the Church have a stance on multiculturalism?