What's Wrong With this Picture?

[Rhamiel]

Why should we not give them citizenship? Why do our laws need to be followed? What makes our current system of laws regarding immigration right and just, and to be followed instead of what the Church is calling for?

what is the Church calling for?

we do need Immigration Reform
everyone knows that
but we also need Immigration Enforcement
we need a secure boarder to prevent terrorists, criminals, and drug smugglers from entering the USA

now, a liberalization and simplification of the current immigration laws would do a lot to help average people who want to move here

 

[ebia]

Nothing that isn't wrong today. Those men are no different from the modern day Christians who ignore the Church's continued calls for amnesty and immigration reform. People get so busy trying to define "real Americans" that they lose focus on what it is to be a real Christian.

You think you've got it bad. We have a supposedly Catholic PM who won the election by demonising asylum seekers and promising to be nastier to them than the other party.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Nothing that isn't wrong today. Those men are no different from the modern day Christians who ignore the Church's continued calls for amnesty and immigration reform. People get so busy trying to define "real Americans" that they lose focus on what it is to be a real Christian.

You know, usually, when there's an offer of amnesty, there's also a requirement of admission of guilt. As well as a promise (whether kept or not, who knows) to not do it again.

Only God forgives that way, and I'm sure he's forgiven them. Now, regarding immigration reform, some things are being talked about, and they're at odds about what to do. I don't really care, as long as they treat them with dignity...

 

[Root of Jesse]

Slavery was long dead by the time that photograph was taken.



What good will come from locking them up en masse? Teaching them a lesson?



I rode motorcycles on public roads in excess of 150mph on perhaps 1000 ocasions durring my youth. What punnishment do you recomend for me? I used illegal drugs a handfull of times. I'm a serial jaywalker. I broke laws not because I sought a better life for my family but for fun, far worse than what the typical illegal immigrant has done. What do I owe and how long should I sit?

Present yourself to the nearest precinct and ask them. If they say "Nevermind", you've paid your debt. If they assign you a jail sentence, serve it. At least you'd be admitting you did something wrong to an authority. I believe if the illegal population was asked to do something similar, and did it, a lot of the animosity would disappear.

 

[KatherineS]

They have committed a crime.
Janice

No. They have not. Overstaying a visa or being in the country without a visa is not a crime, it is a civil infraction. Please don't demonize these folks by posting things that are untrue.

 

[Tallguy88]

I said 'these'... not 'you'.

I don't, for one moment, suspect you equate yourself with the democrats in that picture.

Do you?

You're darn right I do!




















Just kidding.

Yes, it's a guess that they are democrats... of course no one can say for sure because the cowards are hiding behind white hoods... but given the fact that the overwhelming majority of KKK members were democrats... it's a good guess. IMO.

Sure, but let's not pretend that it is any reflection on modern Democrats. After all, the old KKK talking points sound suspiciously like Tea Party rhetoric (America for Americans!)

 

[Root of Jesse]

The KKK doesn't like the decendents of slaves - but they don't like blacks who are not decendents of slaves any better. They aren't big fans of Catholics either.



I would prefer we show them that we are forgiving and willing to help them however we can. I echo the statements of our Church through the USCCB that immigration must become easier and cheaper and that amnesty be granted to these children of God.



I asked you a question, please answer it. What should be done with me? I have broken laws and gotten away with it. Don't you think I should be thrown in prison to teach me a lesson and to demonstrate to me the importance of following the laws of the land? What do I owe and how long should I sit?

I would prefer that they admit that they're wrong, and ask for amnesty. At that point, they can become legal in this country, but I also believe that they should begin with paperwork requesting permission to become a citizen. And some should definitely be denied.

 

[MikeK]

Police knew what I was doing. Heck, half the time there were police with us!

I suspect that if illegal aliens had reason to believe they would be treated the way that Christ's Church advocates that they be treated, they'd sign right up and become citizens. That path is not open to them today, and you'll note that the Church is not telling illegal immigrants to leave or turn themselves in.

 

[Tallguy88]

You know, usually, when there's an offer of amnesty, there's also a requirement of admission of guilt. As well as a promise (whether kept or not, who knows) to not do it again.

Only God forgives that way, and I'm sure he's forgiven them. Now, regarding immigration reform, some things are being talked about, and they're at odds about what to do. I don't really care, as long as they treat them with dignity...

I think most immigration reform people would accept some form of punishment. Whether "back of the line" or delay citizenship for 15 years or whatever. The problem is that the other side seems completely unwilling to accept amnesty under any condition.

 

[Root of Jesse]

It's like the just war thread...to some, the teachings of the Church are only worth following when they line up with supporting one's country, or at least one's vision of it.
God says, "don't engage in gay sex"...wait, let's see what are political party says...it agrees, great! Let's get outspoken against gay sex!!!
God says, "treat immigrants in a welcoming way"...wait, looks like our party doesn't support immigrants, looks like we better keep those lawbreakers out, perhaps the Church got this one wrong.

I don't know that any political party gives permission to anyone to have sex (or not). I don't know that any political party doesn't support immigrants (or not). I know that both political parties have different ideas about how they should be treated (both gays and illegal immigrants (you forgot the word illegal above)), and what should be done with and about them. But for anyone to say <insert political party> wants to throw Granny over the cliff, wants dirty water for our children, wants to send us to war, wants blah, blah, blah.
Even health care. Everyone wants something done. We disagree on what should be done.

Stop with the idiocy, please?

 

[Root of Jesse]

So a poor farmer in Mexico whose family is in clear and present danger from the Zeta Cartel should file government paperwork with the United States Government asking for amnesty and requesting American military support? You can't honestly think that's a reasonable solution.

How about present yourself to the first authority you see at the border, and tell them you're in danger? Don't just sneak over the border and try to disappear...

No, it was not hyperbole. As Christians, everything we do should be compared to what Christ did and what He would do. That is the essence of our salvation: to become Christ-like.

Seems to me Christ said "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's." To me, that says let government do the governing. Christ new how right or wrong the government was (is).

I'll answer with another question: Should we break our nation financially by imprisoning millions of non-violent offenders to satisfy our sense of "Justice?"

Either way, we're breaking the country financially.

Do you mean Elian Gonzales? He was sent back to Cuba, where there is not a drug war happening, and where his biological father lived. So if a child comes over with his mother and father, we toss the parents in jail and do what with the child?



I agree we need to look harder at the issue. If you don't like the one extreme of amnesty, why must the answer be the opposite extreme of incarceration?

First things first. The people coming into the country have no respect for the authority of the government. They should show some respect by presenting themselves to said government, asking for forgiveness, and amnesty. Which does not necessarily include citizenship (especially the right to vote).

So the Christian response to this encouraging armed rebellion?

You think Christ was a pacifist, don't you...?

So for the sake of the guilty, we must not help the innocent? That doesn't quite seem like the essence of the gospel to me. But perhaps I misunderstood the gospel and we should look at the man beaten on the road and say "He should not have been journeying from Jerusalem to Jericho alone."

That's not my position. It's one thing for someone to offer succor to a victim. Victim, in many cases should present themselves to proper personnel as a victim. You wouldn't go to a lawyer for a broken arm. If you want help, you don't just take it.

 

[Root of Jesse]

If the laws are written in such a way that immigrants are not welcomed into our country, then should we punish them for breaking the law? Would God support our laws as written?

And yet we know that the laws do welcome immigrants who ask permission to come into the country...

 

[TheOtherHockeyMom]

And yet we know that the laws do welcome immigrants who ask permission to come into the country...

Did nobody notice the graphic guide to our current immigration laws. Not welcoming at all.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Nearly everyone has a useful skill...it's a shame that it's tough. But have you seen the immigration policies of, say Italy? BBC News - Italian migration policy draws fire

Mexico?
Only Mexicans by birth or naturalization and Mexican companies have the right to acquire ownership of lands, waters, and their appurtenances, or to obtain concessions for the exploitation of mines or of waters.[1] The Mexican government may grant this right to foreigners if they agree before the Ministry of Foreign Affairs not to invoke the protection of their own governments in any matters relating to the property they wish to buy. This is known as the Calvo Clause. This is generally done through a permit process. The 1917 Mexican constitution imposed restrictions on the purchase of land on those without Mexican citizenship. In particular, it prohibits direct ownership of real estate in what is known as the "restricted zone". This zone encompasses all land within 100 km of either Mexican land border and within 50 km of any Mexican coastline. Land 'purchases' in these areas can only be done via a mechanism called a fideicomiso, which roughly is a real estate trust, with a Mexican bank designated as the trustee and having possession of the land title. This mechanism was created to allow for foreign investment in these areas without violating the constitutional principle. The beneficiary of the trust, the foreigner, has all the rights to use, build and sell the property at its market buyer to any eligible buyer. These trusts have a term of 50 years and are renewable.[2] The annual cost of these trusts levied by an underwriting bank, separate from the legal costs paid by a property buyer to establish such a trust, may escalate annually; but presently (in 2011) they have a cap on percentage of annual increase chargeable by banks.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I think most immigration reform people would accept some form of punishment. Whether "back of the line" or delay citizenship for 15 years or whatever. The problem is that the other side seems completely unwilling to accept amnesty under any condition.

There does need to be some sort of sanction, both to stem the flow, and to garner some obedience. Whether a fine, payable over time, after which the finee can become a citizen by going through the proper procedures (it's known as hoop-jumping, I know).

Personally speaking, as a Conservative, the one mistake I believe Ronald Reagan did was to offer amnesty without securing the border first. Had he gotten the border secure, the amnesty would have been workable. I think the same thing here. One thing I do not do, though, is treat a Mexican like dirt. We have several, or many, in our parish. I would only like some admission of guilt, then begin process of becoming citizen. But the border must be sovreign, as everyone else's borders are...

 

[TheOtherHockeyMom]

I don't know that any political party gives permission to anyone to have sex (or not).

MAP: Has Your State Banned Sodomy? | Mother Jones

I don't know that any political party doesn't support immigrants (or not). I know that both political parties have different ideas about how they should be treated (both gays and illegal immigrants (you forgot the word illegal above)), and what should be done with and about them. But for anyone to say <insert political party> wants to throw Granny over the cliff, wants dirty water for our children, wants to send us to war, wants blah, blah, blah.
Even health care. Everyone wants something done. We disagree on what should be done.

Stop with the idiocy, please?

How can you call it idiocy when you have political leaders promoting war, refusing to endorse clean water standards, treating immigrants as subhumans who

were more likely to be drug traffickers “with calves the size of cantaloupes” than valedictorians.

, and whose only plan on healthcare is to give the free market free reign to determine who has access to health care?

 

[TheOtherHockeyMom]

Nearly everyone has a useful skill...it's a shame that it's tough. But have you seen the immigration policies of, say Italy? BBC News - Italian migration policy draws fire

Mexico?
Only Mexicans by birth or naturalization and Mexican companies have the right to acquire ownership of lands, waters, and their appurtenances, or to obtain concessions for the exploitation of mines or of waters.[1] The Mexican government may grant this right to foreigners if they agree before the Ministry of Foreign Affairs not to invoke the protection of their own governments in any matters relating to the property they wish to buy. This is known as the Calvo Clause. This is generally done through a permit process. The 1917 Mexican constitution imposed restrictions on the purchase of land on those without Mexican citizenship. In particular, it prohibits direct ownership of real estate in what is known as the "restricted zone". This zone encompasses all land within 100 km of either Mexican land border and within 50 km of any Mexican coastline. Land 'purchases' in these areas can only be done via a mechanism called a fideicomiso, which roughly is a real estate trust, with a Mexican bank designated as the trustee and having possession of the land title. This mechanism was created to allow for foreign investment in these areas without violating the constitutional principle. The beneficiary of the trust, the foreigner, has all the rights to use, build and sell the property at its market buyer to any eligible buyer. These trusts have a term of 50 years and are renewable.[2] The annual cost of these trusts levied by an underwriting bank, separate from the legal costs paid by a property buyer to establish such a trust, may escalate annually; but presently (in 2011) they have a cap on percentage of annual increase chargeable by banks.

Nearly everyone has a useful skill? The people that are fleeing terrible conditions in their home countries are likely to have the useful skills that help this process flow?

I'm also not getting the comparison to other countries. I live in the US, and I don't think I've done my job if I sit back and say, well, other countries are worse...I might as well champion repealing the violence against women act or the right of women to vote because we'd still be better than Saudi Arabia.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Nearly everyone has a useful skill? The people that are fleeing terrible conditions in their home countries are likely to have the useful skills that help this process flow?

I'm also not getting the comparison to other countries. I live in the US, and I don't think I've done my job if I sit back and say, well, other countries are worse...I might as well champion repealing the violence against women act or the right of women to vote because we'd still be better than Saudi Arabia.

What part of soverign nation do you not understand??? And let me ask you this: Every country, even our neighbor to the north, requires that people have a way to earn a living, so that they don't become a drain on the system.

I'm sorry you don't understand my point. Every country has immigration policy. To be followed to be allowed entry to the country. That is the way it is.

Look, we have too many social problems internally, as a government, to deal with every social problem in the world. There's a reason we're swamped with people wanting to live here permanently-it's because we're the best country on earth. Open the borders, as you want to do, and we will quickly become a third world country. Are you ready for that? Louisiana is still reeling from opening the border to the Vietnamese refugees. We need to control the rate of entry, I'm sorry. We just do. Not only is this the best country on earth, we're the most generous, though I might disagree just where that money goes.

I'll tell you what...why don't you offer 10 illegal families living space in your house, and ask everyone who wants open borders to support 10 families. Do that. Prove your sincerity. Not 10? How about 2. Provide them with medical and living expenses.

In fact, all those who feel we don't pay enough federal taxes in this country, how about listing how much extra you're going to pay on April 15? Heck, go all in...if you're going to receive a refund of your withholding, let 'em keep it.

 

[ebia]

What part of soverign nation do you not understand??? And let me ask you this: Every country, even our neighbor to the north, requires that people have a way to earn a living, so that they don't become a drain on the system. I'm sorry you don't understand my point. Every country has immigration policy. To be followed to be allowed entry to the country. That is the way it is. Look, we have too many social problems internally, as a government, to deal with every social problem in the world. There's a reason we're swamped with people wanting to live here permanently-it's because we're the best country on earth. Open the borders, as you want to do, and we will quickly become a third world country. Are you ready for that? Louisiana is still reeling from opening the border to the Vietnamese refugees. We need to control the rate of entry, I'm sorry. We just do. Not only is this the best country on earth, we're the most generous, though I might disagree just where that money goes. I'll tell you what...why don't you offer 10 illegal families living space in your house, and ask everyone who wants open borders to support 10 families. Do that. Prove your sincerity. Not 10? How about 2. Provide them with medical and living expenses. In fact, all those who feel we don't pay enough federal taxes in this country, how about listing how much extra you're going to pay on April 15? Heck, go all in...if you're going to receive a refund of your withholding, let 'em keep it.

"We have lots here - we have to keep the others out so we can keep it for ourselves"?

Hmm.

Btw, the rest of the world doesn't all think the United States is the best county on earth.

 

[Root of Jesse]

MAP: Has Your State Banned Sodomy? | Mother Jones


How can you call it idiocy when you have political leaders promoting war, refusing to endorse clean water standards, treating immigrants as subhumans who , and whose only plan on healthcare is to give the free market free reign to determine who has access to health care?

How does that map prove that a political party has outlawed gay sex?

Because it is idiocy. The Free Market, when used, tends to keep costs down, because of competition. Because it is idiocy and goes against competitve interests to provide a product that kills people or makes them sick. Regarding promoting war, I believe that's a problem on both sides of the aisle, for different reasons, but the same outcome...Obama wanted to bomb Syria. Hasn't done what he said he would do in most cases where the US is involved in armed conflict.