The importance of immigration

[pnewton]

Do you think we could have recruited, vetted, and trained enough foster parents to care for all these children in that amount of time?

And that is why real law enforcement officers will use discretion, to avoid such a choice. One works with the resources one has before committing an act that is immoral, as Trump’s ICE force did. “Vetting”, the new magic word of the Trump era, means nothing in this context. Nazi concentration guards were vetted thoroughly, to make sure they were loyal Nazis. The process of examination is dependent on what one is examining for.

 

[Augustinian]

Nazi concentration guards were vetted thoroughly, to make sure they were loyal Nazis.

Actually not true.

The gigs as concentration camp guards were given to anyone, often foreign POW’s or other individuals considered to be low level, guys like Demjanjuk. Loyal Nazis like Skorzeny were given tasks like commando raids and things like that.

 

[pnewton]

You may be right. Just because I always heard they were ran by the SS, I am no WWII historian. The point is, “vetting” means nothing. It is like, “I checked” and has no context outside of who checked what for what. Yet ever since some yahoo attached the word “extreme” to it, the word has been a panacea used in place of reason. “Vetting” has no meaning to a child that just wants his mother.

 

[Annie]

We generally vet people before we allow them to become foster parents. Would you prefer that we don’t, on the grounds that “vetting means nothing” and the Nazis vettted concentration camp guards (which I doubt they actually did?)

 

[pnewton]

I am aware that background checks are run and references checked for history of child abuse, drug use, and criminal activity. That is needed for foster homes to operate. The limited number of foster homes are an argument against separating kids and scarring them for life, not for throwing them into confinement as the only option. No, the option is do not do it, and that is the only moral option.

 

[Pup7]

They also run credit checks, employment verification, and check personal references. They pull your driving record and run a Federal records check.

It’s more extensive than you think. It can take months to complete, depending on how many places a person has lived. It’s so extensive that the military will code members to prevent them from being moved to another duty station when they’re applying to be foster parents en route to adoption.

 

[pnewton]

I need a wall to bang my head on.

 

[Pup7]

I’m sure you have four adjacent to you at the moment. Literally, go knock yourself out if you must.

 

[RCIAGraduate]

Hello, I, I think I’m divided on the issue myself. On one hand, I’m leery of the media sensationalism and I feel like they have an ulterior agenda. But on the other, there’s a legitimate issue, I think there’s a strong argument about providing proper accommodations for the families (in fact I see this as an opportunity to create safe, high-quality “family homes” that can be utilized by “domestic” families in need after this crisis) but in practical terms of iffy. Yes, the US has a right to enforce our laws but what if some of these asylum denials are from people who are seriously in danger of the cartel, the Mexican (much less some of the Central American) authorities only have so much capacity (and that’s if they’re legit folks), what then?

 

[rfpapcun]

Jesus was not partial to immigrants. Recall his curing of the ten lepers. Only the Samaritan came back to thank Him. And what did Jesus say, “Were not ten cured, but only this foreigner came back to give thanks.”

The Samaritans had been in Israel for hundreds of years, yet Jesus called the fellow a “foreigner.” Not exactly immigrant friendly.

 

[Pup7]

Hello, I, I think I’m divided on the issue myself. On one hand, I’m leery of the media sensationalism and I feel like they have an ulterior agenda. But on the other, there’s a legitimate issue, I think there’s a strong argument about providing proper accommodations for the families (in fact I see this as an opportunity to create safe, high-quality “family homes” that can be utilized by “domestic” families in need after this crisis) but in practical terms of iffy. Yes, the US has a right to enforce our laws but what if some of these asylum denials are from people who are seriously in danger of the cartel, the Mexican (much less some of the Central American) authorities only have so much capacity (and that’s if they’re legit folks), what then?

So you’d do that over using that money to help with the homeless problems of actual American citizens?

Aren’t American citizens also your neighbor? What about them?

And you do know that claims have to be verified, correct? We can’t take the word of everyone who shows up with a horror story. We just can’t.

 

[pnewton]

I’m sure you have four adjacent to you at the moment. Literally, go knock yourself out if you must.

Okay. Now, I need an aspirin. It has been one of those days. At least this gave me a smile for a minute.

Back to the point. It was never about the process, but about the syntax. I did not mean to argue anything but word usage. Easy, extensive, cursory, or biased, the adjectives will define the process, be it for immigration, foster parenting, pet adoption, or getting a library card.

 

[pnewton]

The Samaritans had been in Israel for hundreds of years, yet Jesus called the fellow a “foreigner.” Not exactly immigrant friendly.

He also used an analogy where the Samaritan was a dog. So Jesus was a racist bigot, or is this interpretation missing some element?

 

[Pup7]

“Vetting” has no meaning to a child that just wants his mother.

“Vetting” has meaning to the citizens of and the lawmakers presiding over the nation whose laws the parent violated. The laws that immigrants AND asylum seekers are meant to follow.

Sorry, but I’m not about open borders, and I’m not about just letting someone in. 'Fess up your information, just like we did. Follow the rules.

 

[pnewton]

I do not often recommend videos, what with YouTube beings such a mine field, but this one was posted by someone on the opposite side of the issue from me. We both liked it. I think it gives one of the more balanced views for a Catholic, regardless of where you stand, and can give you some peace whatever you come to believe.

 

[RCIAGraduate]

So you’d do that over using that money to help with the homeless problems of actual American citizens?

Oh no, not at all, far from it. I see a possible (but probably unrealistic) silver ling, we could create family-based facilities to house these migrant families and when the crisis is resolved, we change use these facilities to serve local families in need.

 

[Pup7]

You’re still putting the needs of them over the needs of the citizens - many of whom have been homeless for years…and years…and years…what about THOSE kids? The ones living in shelters and taking baths in gas station restrooms?

Essentially a lot of our homeless citizens are equally undocumented. They can’t get state ID because they don’t even have an address.

What about THEM? Why are they secondary?

 

[pnewton]

What about THEM? Why are they secondary?

I see this as a false dichotomy. This current action of our president is costing over $600 a day per child, money that could be used for the homeless. Our military spending could likewise be curtailed to help the homeless. Finally, if nothing else, raise taxes to help the homeless. I am willing to pay.

Then there is the small fact that we do have a lot of programs for the homeless. I came across a new one just a week ago.

 

[Sarcelle]

Is it really a false dichotomy?

Unless the amount of money we can spend on the homeless and the migrant is infinite there is no way we can help all of our homeless and all of the migrants. This especially true if the amount of migrants will keep increasing once they learn they can get a free ride up north and the situation in Central America is not resolved.

 

[pnewton]

Unless the amount of money we can spend on the homeless and the migrant is infinite

It does not have to be infinite. It only needs to be unfixed, and it is.

Think of it this way. Whether I feed each of children one hot dog, or one child two hot dogs, may be a decision if I only have two. But if I decide each will get two, I do not need infinite hot dogs, only more.

But in this case, I hardly doubt our wonderfully kinder prisons will be packing them in from the South.