USCCB Condemns Separating Immigrant Children from Families

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pup7 said:
And the law says “trust but verify”.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Children are not very good liars. It should not be taken at face value, but verifying this should not be sen as an obstacle. Those caught trying to use a child in such a way could then be treated as the child traffickers they are. The child then could be fostered, or housed until family can be found, from the native country primarily, here, secondarily. Those that are orphans will present a special challenge, one that might be met by non-profit groups.
 
Loud-living-dogma said:
Ripped permanently? Since when is it permanent?
Click to expand...
In definite is a better term. Still there is was no end seen when ICE ratcheted up this enforcement. They do not know where are the parents of all the children or, and visa versa. So in this, ICE is nothing like the Nazi SS. They were at least organized and kept good records.
 
“Asylum” is basically a magic word used in an attempt to gain access to the US. These folks didn’t go to a port of entry and ask for asylum because they are being threatened by the government, etc… They wandered across the border and then, when caught, cry asylum. These aren’t, for example, Jews fleeing Hitler’s regime or Stalin’s pogroms. They aren’t former residents of Iran from before the Islamic theocracy, members of the “White Russians” during the revolution, or similar.

They are people who have wandered in for economic reasons, just like the folks who came to the US from Europe. The difference is those folks wound up going through ports of entry and went through the process to become citizens. They didn’t just wander in.

With regard to ensuring that the children are actually theirs, would almost have to DNA test the whole lot of folks.
 
The intent wasn’t to change the subject but to correct you, and I’ll quote you as often as I need to for that purpose.

Keeping parents in the dark about their children is not keeping these children safer. It’s a power play.
 
Seeksadvice said:
“Asylum” is basically a magic word used in an attempt to gain access to the US.
Click to expand...
No. It’s not a “magic word.” It’s a legal term.
Seeksadvice said:
They wandered across the border and then, when caught, cry asylum.
Click to expand...
Actually,40-49% of them arrived legally.
Seeksadvice said:
These aren’t, for example, Jews fleeing Hitler’s regime or Stalin’s pogroms. They aren’t former residents of Iran from before the Islamic theocracy, members of the “White Russians” during the revolution, or similar.
Click to expand...
I’m curious - what is your Magic Number? How many deaths does it take before you find fleeing one’s country morally acceptable?
 
blackforest said:
Keeping parents in the dark about their children is not keeping these children safer. It’s a power play.
Click to expand...
You have no clue about how the current system operates and why.
The parents are in jail or perhaps detention for a reason
More than a few parents have arranged for their children to be ‘kidnapped’ while they are in the responsibility of the state. Fostering parents need the piece of mind that their address has not been shared.
 
Last edited:
I would volunteer to separate myself from my children for up to 20 days if I thought it would help stop human sex trafficking on the Mexico border.
 
From my viewpoint, we have American Catholics being told one thing by Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump and another thing by their own bishops who can show them 100 years of written directions concerning immigration coming from the Vatican to back up their position, and they’re choosing to side with Trump.

I fail to see how this is different from Catholics who are told by the Church that allowing gays to attempt even civil marriage is wrong but who decide for themselves that they would rather side with the view that has become politically popular.
 
Last edited:
There are good Catholics that disagree with the Bishops. Is that sinful? I don’t think so.
In fact, dozens of bishops, if not hundreds of them, need a good schooling in objective facts and need to stop being shills for the Democratic Party — the same Democrats who give them loads of money when they are in power.
Click to expand...
Link: churchmilitant(dot)com/video/episode/vortex-they-wont-stop
 
Sid said:
There are good Catholics that disagree with the Bishops. Is that sinful? I don’t think so.
Click to expand...
To paraphrase Trump, they are dissenters and selfish people, though I assume some are good Catholics.

Seriously, of course good Catholics disagree with them on this. Good Catholics are wrong all the time. They sin all the time. The only point that has been made is that on this one issue with immigration, there is one clearly immoral choice that should not be considered, leaving a myriad of other options.
 
If I were President, I think I could reluctantly approve of separating families for a short time to thwart child sex trafficking and the border slave trade. Not to mention drug traffickers and terrorists.
 
Last edited:
As a thought experiment, if 80% of the population of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, etc wanted to escape the violence poverty and gangs of their home countries, how many people would we be expected to give asylum to?
 
Last edited:
Sid said:
There are good Catholics that disagree with the Bishops. Is that sinful? I don’t think so.
In fact, dozens of bishops, if not hundreds of them, need a good schooling in objective facts and need to stop being shills for the Democratic Party — the same Democrats who give them loads of money when they are in power.
Click to expand...
Avoid chuchmilitant and anything else from Michael Voris. He does not represent the Church and borders on being a heretic himself. Beware!
Click to expand...
 
Loud-living-dogma said:
As a thought experiment, if 80% of the population of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, etc wanted to escape the violence poverty and gangs of their home countries, how many people would we be expected to give asylum to?
Click to expand...
This is a thought experiment for a different thread. The statement by the Bishops was about separating children from their parents, not about admitting people as immigrants.

However, in three weeks, the Sunday Gospel for the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time may give you some guidance as to the answer Jesus would give you your thought experiment.
 
Last edited:
Loud-living-dogma said:
As a thought experiment, if 80% of the population of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, etc wanted to escape the violence poverty and gangs of their home countries, how many people would we be expected to give asylum to?
Click to expand...
The Popes and the bishops have always held that finding a way to return a region to peace and safety for its inhabitants is always the first priority and the only long-term solution.
So, as your thought experiment, what should the governments of the rest of the Americas be doing, in that case?
Think about it: how bad would things have to get in your home town before even 20% of the population decided they needed to take their children and flee to a foreign country that either does not want you at all or maybe wants to have you and your children around as second-class citizens, a country with one of the most difficult languages in the world to learn? It isn’t as if the US government is still giving away 160 acres of farmland for a filing fee and 5 years of continuous occupation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top