Pope Leo says faith and love for migrants are connected

[BCP1928]

Those of us who would like see more stringent and rigorous immigration and asylum requirements reject the notion that we have to do either.

Are you familiar with the concept called "Defensive Democracy"?

Defensive democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Numerous democratic countries actually have provisions on the books of that nature (examples outlined in the wiki).


It's a recognition of the reality that democracy can be used against itself, and aims to prevent that.

Or, in other terms, it's an acknowledgment of the possibility that people can "vote their way out of of democracy, and into some other type of system that doesn't provide voting as a mechanism to revert it back", and seeks to prevent that.



What I was referring to, is the fact that the people of San Fran had been dealing with the rising rent costs and pricing pressures that long pre-date the tech boom due to various population influxes.

It was only when an influx starting involving people who weren't necessarily "like-minded" that they started to take a serious issue with it.

The cultural influx of the 60's (Haight Ashbury/The Summer of Love/etc...) brought a lot of new people to the area (something like 80,000 people -- to a city that only had ~650,000 at the time)

In the early 70's, it became something of a "safe haven" for the gay community, and tens of thousands more moved there.

By mid-70's, the median rents in San Fran were upwards of 60% higher than the national median.

Nobody was petitioning local government to stop the influx of people (because the influx involved people who they saw as like-minded, and "fitting in with the overall vibe" of the city).


Compare that to the tech boom era
Around 71,000 net new residents were added over the decade.


So the migration for that wasn't anymore "striking" than the "counterculture/free love" migration in terms of the numbers...so the problem they had with seems like it was more cultural than logistical.


People are allowed to have a preference for what they want the social fabric of their community to be.

Sure, there is a certain amount of bigotry in all of us, and certainly we like it better when our immediate community reflects our personal values as much as possible. But that is why there are different communities.

What I am getting from you is something rather different. But San Francisco is probably not a good example for us to discuss, because I lived in San Francisco or an immediately adjacent community from before the "Summer of Love" until the mid '70s so it is unlikely we will agree about what happened there.

And yes, I understand defensive democracy. I think we just disagree about what values we should defend ourselves against. But that's why new citizens take an oath, which contains the values we must share.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Sure, there is a certain amount of bigotry in all of us, and certainly we like it better when our immediate community reflects our personal values as much as possible. But that is why there are different communities.

What I am getting from you is something rather different. But San Francisco is probably not a good example for us to discuss, because I lived in San Francisco or an immediately adjacent community from before the "Summer of Love" until the mid '70s so it is unlikely we will agree about what happened there.

And yes, I understand defensive democracy. I think we just disagree about what values we should defend ourselves against. But that's why new citizens take an oath, which contains the values we must share.

I would push back on that on two fronts.

1) "taking an oath to uphold the values we're all supposed to share" can be a "phone it in" type of thing where people say it, but actions don't really reflect it.

All of the GOP members of congress and the executive branch all take an oath to uphold said values. Yet, would I be correct in assuming you probably think that a lot of them violate/ignore that oath on a semi-regular basis?


2) Green card holders, refugees, asylum seekers, and undocumented immigrants do not take any sort of oath. And a group of folks don't need to be full fledged citizens to drastically reshape the culture of communities.

That's even doubly true in the increasing number of municipalities and states pushing to allow for non-citizens to vote in local and school board elections.

Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

Shifting cultures in neighborhoods is how you end up with things like this:

Detroit-area city OKs animal sacrifice for religious reasons

Residents of a Detroit-area community with a large Muslim population can sacrifice animals at home for religious reasons.The Hamtramck City Council explicitly a

wwmt.com

 

[BCP1928]

I would push back on that on two fronts.

1) "taking an oath to uphold the values we're all supposed to share" can be a "phone it in" type of thing where people say it, but actions don't really reflect it.

All of the GOP members of congress and the executive branch all take an oath to uphold said values. Yet, would I be correct in assuming you probably think that a lot of them violate/ignore that oath on a semi-regular basis?

Of course. But I was speaking of what we required of them culturally, and that's pretty much it. They have to obey the Constitution and the law of the land. Other than that, why should they not retain elements of their own culture as they wish, provided they do nothing illegal? They are also entitled to similar accomodation to their own culture, such as we give to others.

2) Green card holders, refugees, asylum seekers, and undocumented immigrants do not take any sort of oath. And a group of folks don't need to be full fledged citizens to drastically reshape the culture of communities.

That's even doubly true in the increasing number of municipalities and states pushing to allow for non-citizens to vote in local and school board elections.

Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

Shifting cultures in neighborhoods is how you end up with things like this:

Detroit-area city OKs animal sacrifice for religious reasons

Residents of a Detroit-area community with a large Muslim population can sacrifice animals at home for religious reasons.The Hamtramck City Council explicitly a

wwmt.com

That is actually a tribute to real American values and our committement to religious freedom. They want to butcher (with permit and inspection) and eat an animal for a feast of thanksgiving. Are your cultural values so delicate that you can't stand it that the animal in question is not a turkey?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Of course. But I was speaking of what we required of them culturally, and that's pretty much it. They have to obey the Constitution and the law of the land. Other than that, why should they not retain elements of their own culture as they wish, provided they do nothing illegal? They are also entitled to similar accomodation to their own culture, such as we give to others.

That is actually a tribute to real American values and our committement to religious freedom. They want to butcher (with permit and inspection) and eat an animal for a feast of thanksgiving. Are your cultural values so delicate that you can't stand it that the animal in question is not a turkey?

They're not "just butchering"...

Have you seen any videos of Halal or Kosher slaughtering before? They're not allowed to stun the animal first...it's quite a visual

Based on the article, it sounds like they originally didn't want to allow the practice, but eventually faced pressure from special interests and changing demographics.

Perhaps the long time residents may not be crazy about their kids playing in the backyard and looking over and seeing terrified goats getting their throats slit and convulsing on the ground.


Take for instance...
If you lived in a more progressive city/state, and was happy with the fact that there were local ordinances that stated that people can't shoot guns in their yards, and in a matter of 10 years there was an influx of people from conservative southern areas who moved to town, and then voted to change that law, and now there's people out there popping off rounds with their AR-15's 50 feet from your house while your kids were trying to play outside.

Would your stance be a laid back "well shucks, looks like the culture of the town changed, I guess we'll just have to make the best of it and realize that the make-up of the town has shifted, the law changed, so they're not technically breaking any laws"

Or would your reaction be more along the lines of "This is BS, if they wanted to shoot guns in their yards, then they should've stayed in Kentucky or Alabama"?

 

[BCP1928]

They're not "just butchering"...

Have you seen any videos of Halal or Kosher slaughtering before? They're not allowed to stun the animal first...it's quite a visual

Based on the article, it sounds like they originally didn't want to allow the practice, but eventually faced pressure from special interests and changing demographics.

Perhaps the long time residents may not be crazy about their kids playing in the backyard and looking over and seeing terrified goats getting their throats slit and convulsing on the ground.

I know what it looks like. I lived in a Muslim country for two years--all the meat is prepared that way. Jews do the same. It's just not as lurid as you make it sound.

Take for instance...
If you lived in a more progressive city/state, and was happy with the fact that there were local ordinances that stated that people can't shoot guns in their yards, and in a matter of 10 years there was an influx of people from conservative southern areas who moved to town, and then voted to change that law, and now there's people out there popping off rounds with their AR-15's 50 feet from your house while your kids were trying to play outside.

Would your stance be a laid back "well shucks, looks like the culture of the town changed, I guess we'll just have to make the best of it and realize that the make-up of the town has shifted, the law changed, so they're not technically breaking any laws"

Or would your reaction be more along the lines of "This is BS, if they wanted to shoot guns in their yards, then they should've stayed in Kentucky or Alabama"?

If they've got the votes to put through a law that would let them do anything like that then I would just have to suck it up,

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I know what it looks like. I lived in a Muslim country for two years--all the meat is prepared that way. Jews do the same. It's just not as lurid as you make it sound.

That's why I mentioned both Halal and Kosher slaughter in my post... they're very similar.

And it is practice that people would rightfully have some objections to their kids seeing while playing in the backyard on a random afternoon.

If they've got the votes to put through a law that would let them do anything like that then I would just have to suck it up,

That's never been the progressive position on anything...sorry, but it hasn't.

The California Prop 8 situation would be evidence that it's never been the progressive position to just "lay down and take it" when they don't have the votes to get their way.

Progressives are still pushing activism on 70/30 issues that they're on the losing end of.


When people are on the winning end of pure direct democracy, it's "Democracy is sacred, nothing is more important"
When people are on the losing end of pure direct democracy, it's time to trot out the "2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner" expression.

 

[BCP1928]

That's why I mentioned both Halal and Kosher slaughter in my post... they're very similar.

And it is practice that people would rightfully have some objections to their kids seeing while playing in the backyard on a random afternoon.

I don't know where you've seen this done, but that's not the way the Muslim religion requires it to be done and I expect the permit conditions wouldn't allow it.

That's never been the progressive position on anything...sorry, but it hasn't.

It's my position. You aren't talking to a Progressive now.

The California Prop 8 situation would be evidence that it's never been the progressive position to just "lay down and take it" when they don't have the votes to get their way.

Progressives are still pushing activism on 70/30 issues that they're on the losing end of.


When people are on the winning end of pure direct democracy, it's "Democracy is sacred, nothing is more important"
When people are on the losing end of pure direct democracy, it's time to trot out the "2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner" expression.

That doesn't make much sense. I don't know what your point is, but you make an impression, an impression of a person who is resentful that his values aren't being accorded as much respect as other peoples' and it's not fair because your values are the 'real true American values' and theirs are not. Or something like that.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I don't know where you've seen this done, but that's not the way the Muslim religion requires it to be done and I expect the permit conditions wouldn't allow it.

I don't know where you've seen this done, but that's not the way the Muslim religion requires it to be done and I expect the permit conditions wouldn't allow it.

I mean, do you want me to post a video or two? It's not a pleasant thing to watch.

It's even less pleasant when you realize that they think it means they're "putting their sins" on that animal, and killing it for something they did...

"Some living thing has to suffer and pay the price for the naughty thoughts I've had, but it's not gonna be me" is borderline sociopathic.

That doesn't make much sense. I don't know what your point is, but you make an impression, an impression of a person who is resentful that his values aren't being accorded as much respect as other peoples' and it's not fair because your values are the 'real true American values' and theirs are not. Or something like that.

My values would actually lean more towards the left-libertarian quadrant of this graph

Are my values more in-line with the American ideal than that of someone who prefers an authoritarian or theocratic power structure, but simply moved here because "that's where the jobs are"? I'd say yes.

 

[RileyG]

Easy for him to say when he's surrounded by guards in his city state.

Yes, uhhh...

Remember when Pope John Paul II was shot and nearly died? (He later forgave his would be assassin) We have security all throughout the world....just an observation is all.

 

[RileyG]

"No Christian can regard the poor simply as a societal problem; they are part of our 'family,'" Leo writes. "They are "'one of us.'"

This is the part of the Christian ethos and fundamental command that MAGA cannot seem to hear.

Now how best to deal with “the poor”, the vulnerable, those seeking asylum and a life with hope, is a great challenge that requires collaboration and honest effort. Fixing broken social systems, immigration policy and procedures is a massive task. But it cannot even be started if the poor are not seen as one of us.

Amen, well said, sir!

 

[BCP1928]

I mean, do you want me to post a video or two? It's not a pleasant thing to watch.

I have watched it. Properly done it is considered the most humane way of slaughtering an animal.

It's even less pleasant when you realize that they think it means they're "putting their sins" on that animal, and killing it for something they did...

"Some living thing has to suffer and pay the price for the naughty thoughts I've had, but it's not gonna be me" is borderline sociopathic.



My values would actually lean more towards the left-libertarian quadrant of this graph

View attachment 371549

Are my values more in-line with the American ideal than that of someone who prefers an authoritarian or theocratic power structure, but simply moved here because "that's where the jobs are"? I'd say yes.

The values you seem most concerned about seem mostly to do with sex, not politics, but given the current political situation, if you are fearful of those who prefer authoritarian or theocratic government, then your own fellow citizens are your greatest danger.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

There we saw how Jesus identified himself “with the lowest ranks of society” and how, with his love poured out to the end, he confirms the dignity of every human being, especially when “they are weak, scorned, or suffering.”
As we contemplate Christ’s love, “we too are inspired to be more attentive to the sufferings and needs of others, and confirmed in our efforts to share in his work of liberation as instruments for the spread of his love.”

 

[rambot]

Shifting cultures in neighborhoods is how you end up with things like this:

Detroit-area city OKs animal sacrifice for religious reasons

Residents of a Detroit-area community with a large Muslim population can sacrifice animals at home for religious reasons.The Hamtramck City Council explicitly a

wwmt.com

"Freedom of Religion..."...


"but not THAT kind of religion"


Seriously, if they're doing it in their backyard and it ain't harming you at all, why get all bent out of shape about it?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

"Freedom of Religion..."...


"but not THAT kind of religion"


Seriously, if they're doing it in their backyard and it ain't harming you at all, why get all bent out of shape about it?

You typically won't find me posting the "Freedom of religion carve-outs for exemptions from actual laws" stuff...quite the opposite, no matter the religion.

There's perfectly valid reasons why people would want their kids in the backyard seeing the next door neighbors performing Kosher or Halal slaughter.

The same way I wouldn't want my next door neighbors having a Westboro Baptist Church demonstration in their backyard in plain view of the neighborhood children.

 

[rambot]

You typically won't find me posting the "Freedom of religion carve-outs for exemptions from actual laws" stuff...quite the opposite, no matter the religion.

There's perfectly valid reasons why people would want their kids in the backyard seeing the next door neighbors performing Kosher or Halal slaughter.

[I'm assuming you meant to say "wouldn't want...."] The burden of "overting your eyes" is actually not that burdensome. It's VERY easy for me to not see what's going on in my neighbour's yard...though I have noticed a lot of american properties don't really have visual blocking fences or hedges and such.

The same way I wouldn't want my next door neighbors having a Westboro Baptist Church demonstration in their backyard in plain view of the neighborhood children.

But if WBC have a RIGHT to do that demonstration, why shouldn't Halal slaughters in a backyard be okay?

I get that it may be "socially distasteful" but what are other reasons?

PLENTY of Conservatives take their 4 and 5 year olds out hunting where they'll shoot and animal and field dress it right in front of them (or really any age kid). It would make 0 sense to me if hunters had a problem with this.

If you can butcher your deer in your backyard after a hunt, it just makes sense.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

[I'm assuming you meant to say "wouldn't want...."] The burden of "overting your eyes" is actually not that burdensome. It's VERY easy for me to not see what's going on in my neighbour's yard...though I have noticed a lot of american properties don't really have visual blocking fences or hedges and such.

We're talking about the Detroit area... postage stamp yards, etc...

But if WBC have a RIGHT to do that demonstration, why shouldn't Halal slaughters in a backyard be okay?

I get that it may be "socially distasteful" but what are other reasons?

PLENTY of Conservatives take their 4 and 5 year olds out hunting where they'll shoot and animal and field dress it right in front of them (or really any age kid). It would make 0 sense to me if hunters had a problem with this.

If you can butcher your deer in your backyard after a hunt, it just makes sense.

Animal cruelty laws would be one reason.

Are you familiar with the process of Halal and/or Kosher slaughtering? (they're pretty similar)

Nations like Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Finland, Austria, Greece, and Iceland have laws on their books that require "pre-cut stunning"


There are public health concerns as well.

When a "backyard ritual slaughter" is performed, what do you suppose happens with the parts of the animal they're not allowed to consume? You think that may get just a little bit stinky in the summer time in a densely populated urban area? That stuff getting tossed in a dumpter, guaranteed... it's not you can go to the local meat market and say "here's the remaining parts of this goat I killed in my backyard yesterday, you want it?

It's not like a state-regulated Kosher/Halal slaughtering facility that's still at least inspected by the health department, and can ensure the safe inspection and safe transfer of the "religiously disallowed" part of the animal to be processed in a non-Kosher/halal facility for regular consumption.

 

[rambot]

We're talking about the Detroit area... postage stamp yards, etc...



Animal cruelty laws would be one reason.

Are you familiar with the process of Halal and/or Kosher slaughtering? (they're pretty similar)

Nope. I'm guessing rhey bleed it out....

Again, like hunters in the US.

Nations like Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Finland, Austria, Greece, and Iceland have laws on their books that require "pre-cut stunning"

Does the us?

There are public health concerns as well.

When a "backyard ritual slaughter" is performed, what do you suppose happens with the parts of the animal they're not allowed to consume? You think that may get just a little bit stinky in the summer time in a densely populated urban area? That stuff getting tossed in a dumpter, guaranteed... it's not you can go to the local meat market and say "here's the remaining parts of this goat I killed in my backyard yesterday, you want iT

1.Yeah. In densely populated muslims areas Theres definitely not a butcher in the area that could deal with...goat parts.
2. What happens when hunters do it? Just saw a Pic of my brother processing his deer on the kitchen table.
3. A rubbish dumpster that smells bad. Lol. That's not the most convincing argument...I mean saying "guaranteed" is no guarantee of anything.

Could I guess you have not yourself slaughtered anything? I haven t but I have been around many slaughters. Nobody who slaughters animals has interest in having
an undo impact on thwir neighbour's yet all the arguments I hear against this seem to PRESUME negative outcomes. In fact they presume negative things are already happenning.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Yeah. In densely populated muslims areas Theres definitely not a butcher in the area that could deal with...goat parts.

What happens when hunters do it?

It's not just densely populated with Muslims in that area, it's densely populated - period.

Evidenced by the fact that it was an extremely close vote (and has been reversed and re-reversed a few times now)

If it was an all Muslim area, I imagine their local ordinance exemption would've passed with flying colors instead of it being a hotly contested split vote.


It's not that a local non-Muslim butcher wouldn't know how to butcher a ruminant animal for consumption by other people if they had to, it's that it's not allowed. If I hunted a deer, and then kept the parts I was "allowed to eat" and showed up at the local butcher with the hind quarters and organ meats and said "I'm not allowed to eat these, you want to sell it to some other people??", legally they'd have to refuse. They have no idea how I processed it or what precautions I took to keep the meat safe.

Around here, there are butchers that will do deer processing, but there's labelling on it that says "not for commercial sale", and you only get your own deer and they're not allowed to mix animals. Meaning nobody else is going to get sick if I failed to clean the knife properly. In fact, one local meat place put up a sign last year saying "we no longer do deer processing" precisely because there was an "incident"

And per the AP article about it

Detroit-area city OKs animal sacrifice for religious reasons

HAMTRAMCK, Mich. (AP) — Residents of a Detroit-area community with a large Muslim population can sacrifice animals at home for religious reasons.

apnews.com

There was a city wide ban on slaughtering and butchering animals in the yard - full stop.

They wanted an exception to the rule to be created for religious reasons, so there weren't people in that neighborhood harvesting deer meat in their backyard prior to that.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

It's not just densely populated with Muslims in that area, it's densely populated - period.

Evidenced by the fact that it was an extremely close vote (and has been reversed and re-reversed a few times now)

If it was an all Muslim area, I imagine their local ordinance exemption would've passed with flying colors instead of it being a hotly contested split vote.

Per the article you linked, over half of the city is of Yemeni or Bangladeshi descent. Over 60% of the city is Muslim. It's not "all Muslim", but that's a healthy majority.

And per the AP article about it

Detroit-area city OKs animal sacrifice for religious reasons

HAMTRAMCK, Mich. (AP) — Residents of a Detroit-area community with a large Muslim population can sacrifice animals at home for religious reasons.

apnews.com

There was a city wide ban on slaughtering and butchering animals in the yard - full stop.

They wanted an exception to the rule to be created for religious reasons, so there weren't people in that neighborhood harvesting deer meat in their backyard prior to that.

Hamtramck residents will be required to notify the city, pay a fee and make their property available for inspection.

That seems to cover a lot of your objections, at least on paper. If they have to be prepared for a health inspection, then that probably covers food safety as well as not disturbing the neighbors

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Hamtramck residents will be required to notify the city, pay a fee and make their property available for inspection.

That seems to cover a lot of your objections, at least on paper. If they have to be prepared for a health inspection, then that probably covers food safety as well as not disturbing the neighbors

Mmhmm, I'm sure they're all following that rule to a T.

Not to mention "Hey city, I'm just letting you know that I'll be having part of a dead goat in my back yard tomorrow, here's my $200, you can come look at it if you'd like"

I'm sure that'll ease the shock of neighbor's kids seeing 5 men hold down a live goat that's conscience and aware, and slitting its throat and then watching it squirm and yelp in pain on the ground (and often vomit and convulse...yeah, that's part of it).

All in the name of symbolically "transferring ones sins onto the animal, and then making it pay the price for the sins"