USCCB Condemns Separating Immigrant Children from Families

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sid said:
There are good Catholics that disagree with the Bishops. Is that sinful? I don’t think so.
Click to expand...
That is exactly what the Catholics who are in favor of same sex marriage and lenient abortion laws say.

For Ms. Pelosi, the notion of disagreeing with other Catholics about abortion has not weighed on her sense of faith. “I think everyone grants everyone their position,” she said. “The church has their position, and we have ours, which is that a woman has free will given to her by God. My family is very pro-life,” she added, noting that she has lived with the conflict all her life.
(New York Times, In Pelosi, Strong Catholic Faith and Abortion Rights Coexist, Sept. 21, 2015)

 
Last edited:
Pope John Paul II, again:
I wrote in 1989: “Often, flourishing Christian communities started out as small colonies of migrants which, under the leadership of a priest, met in humble buildings to hear the Word of God and to beg him for courage to face the trials and sacrifices of their difficult life” (Message for World Migration Day, n. 2, Insegnamenti XII, 2. p. 491; L’Osservatore Romano English edition, 30 October, 1989, p. 8). Many peoples came to know Christ through migrants who arrived from the lands evangelized in ancient times.

Today the trend in migratory movement has been as it were inverted. It is non-Christians, increasingly numerous, who go to countries with a Christian tradition in search of work and better living conditions, and they frequently do so as illegal immigrants and refugees. This causes complex problems which are not easy to solve. For her part, the Church, like the Good Samaritan, feels it her duty to be close to the illegal immigrant and refugee, contemporary icon of the despoiled traveler, beaten and abandoned on side of the road to Jericho (cf. Lk 10:30). She goes towards him, pouring “on his wounds the oil of consolation and the wine of hope” (Roman Missal, Common Preface VII), feeling herself called to be a living sign of Christ, who came that all might have life in abundance (cf. Jn 10:10).

In this way she acts in the spirit of Christ and follows in his steps, at the same time attending to the proclamation of the Good News and to solidarity towards others, elements which are intimately united in the Church’s activity.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-p...f_jp-ii_mes_26081996_world-migration-day.html

Please do not tell me that John Paul II just did not get it, that he was somehow out of touch with the pastoral reality in countries receiving refugees. He lived through World War II, he lived through the occupation of his homeland by both the Nazis and the Communists, through times of great want and danger. He knows all about choosing what to render to Caesar and what to render to God.
 
Last edited:
PetraG said:
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?
Click to expand...
I agree with this 100%. President Trump should summon the despots of these failed nations to Mar a Lago, so he can read the riot act to them and give them instruction to get their countries in order. The Roosevelt Corollary of the Monroe Doctrine give America the authority to do exactly that.
 
Seeksadvice said:
“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.
Click to expand...
I am honestly of the belief that if the Russian Revolution, Stalin’s pogroms or Hitler’s regime were happening today, the naysayers would be of the same mindset in relation to them

“why is what’s going on in Russia/Germany our problem? Why doesn’t everyone simply stay over there and make their own countries great again?”
'why can’t they all simply wait in Europe and apply in the American consulates there and do it the legal way?
“why can’t they seek asylum in the other European/Asian countries they pass through on their way to the US?”
“how do we know they’re REALLY White Russians/anti-communists fleeing Stalin/Jews fleeing Nazi Germany and not Commie or Nazi spies and infiltrators or some other species of deviant criminal?”
 
Augustinian said:
40.png
PetraG:
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?
Click to expand...
I agree with this 100%. President Trump should summon the despots of these failed nations to Mar a Lago, so he can read the riot act to them and give them instruction to get their countries in order. The Roosevelt Corollary of the Monroe Doctrine give America the authority to do exactly that.
Click to expand...
And I am sure they would hang on his every word like the G8 leaders did at their recent summit.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
40.png
Loud-living-dogma:
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.
Click to expand...
The Pharisees favorite tool. I am not Jesus, and the question is not on topic.
 
Yes, I wonder about the leaders of those countries. Rampant with crime and corruption, they seem to have no problem with large segments of their populations trying to get the heck out. Wouldn’t they see this as a brain drain problem? As long as they’re sending $$ back home, the leaders seem okay with a lot of folks leaving.
 
blackforest said:
They don’t need to be separated in the first place. I stand with the Catholic Church on this one.
Click to expand...
I don’t think housing children in the penitentiary with the parents is that good of an idea, regardless of who might be advocating it.

The language being used as well as the behavior of some of the inmates isn’t really something that most children need to be exposed to.

Some of the children undoubtably need to be scared straight, but that’s not the majority and I can’t see how incarceration of children with their parents is always a great idea.
 
Augustinian said:
I don’t think housing children in the penitentiary with the parents is that good of an idea, regardless of who might be advocating it.
Click to expand...
The penitentiary??? Why is anyone being housed in a penitentiary without being convicted of a felony?
 
pnewton said:
The penitentiary??? Why is anyone being housed in a penitentiary without being convicted of a felony?
Click to expand...
Sometimes if they are waiting on their trial, they are kept on ice so it can be insured that they will show up.

With those claiming asylum, a large number are NOT showing up for their hearing, and instead of contesting and listening to the adjudication of their asylum claims, they are just disappearing from federal view into the America- often residing in Sanctuary Cities and States who are scoffing at Federal immigration law.
 
Augustinian said:
Sometimes if they are waiting on their trial, they are kept on ice so it can be insured that they will show up.
Click to expand...
Yes, but the use of the word “penitentiary” is specific to a place no child should be housed, as opposed to some other form of housing.
 
I read it. You still have no proof that they are nefariously risking their lives (did you read the article?), to “chase gold.” As the article quite clearly states, they’re pursuing family ties, a concept on which the U.S. has historically prioritized admission of immigrants, asylees, and refugees.
 
Augustinian said:
I agree with this 100%. President Trump should summon the despots of these failed nations to Mar a Lago, so he can read the riot act to them and give them instruction to get their countries in order. The Roosevelt Corollary of the Monroe Doctrine give America the authority to do exactly that.
Click to expand...
How this is handled is a matter of discretion, but any President of the United States would be wise to avoid using terms like “summon” and “despots” and “failed nations” if he wants to be accepted as a regional leader.

Remember that Teddy Roosevelt said: Speak softly, but carry a big stick.
Both halves of that advice are extremely important. Someone who is loud and carries a big stick just comes off as a bully. More to the point, there is no nation so powerful that it can accomplish as much with power as nations with far fewer resources could accomplish by diplomacy and cooperation.

I don’t mean that you necessarily mean that; I only mean that nations do not cope well with being talked down to. Leaders have to give the sense that they require some degree of respect from other leaders, or they’ll lose their standing to lead their own people. It is important that our leaders talk to theirs in ways that don’t lead to anyone losing face with their own voters. I think the President could do this without losing his own base…or am I wrong? Do you think part of what makes Donald Trump attractive to his constituents is his willingness to talk about other leaders and those perceived to be political opponents in denigrating terms?
 
Last edited:
Where did you get your information? From what I can turn up, Laura Silsby and 9 other Baptists were charged with transporting children illegally, but the charge was they were taking them to an orphanage in the Dominican Republic. There were no charges of sex trafficking and there is some indication that it was a very grave mistake rather than an attempt at a crime. From what I can turn up on Allison Mack, she was involved in a case where the group was charged with the kidnapping of adults, but not any children. I can’t find what either one of them has to do with the Clintons, let alone any connection closer than what our current President would characterize as a witch hunt.

It is really important before you post reports from the internet that you do some background checking to be absolutely as certain as possible that what you are repeating is true. When possible, cite your sources, so if the sources turn up to have defrauded you, others who took your word will know it. The internet is the most powerful gossip machine ever created by humankind. It is the nuclear bomb of gossip devices. We have to be very careful with it.

So–if these are credible charges, please cite concrete evidence that they are true. For instance, when someone is charged of a serious offense, you can often find the actual charges posted on the internet–as in a copy of the indictment itself.
 
PS It is particularly important that you can connect the pictures included on that poster with the persons being charged with criminal behavior. Those are shocking photographs. If it turns out the photographs have nothing to do with any of the recognizable persons who are being targeted by the poster, including the pictures amounts to calumny, since the intention of the poster is obviously to connect the pictures of the children and what was done to them to the behaviors of the adults and therefore the reputations of the adults pictured.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top