Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
Interfaith Statement on Immigration Reform
Topic Started: Mar 27 2006, 01:27 PM (793 Views)
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Since we have a thread dealing with the politics of immigration reform, let's have one on the morality of immigration reform.

For those of you who are believers, do you square your political views on immigration with the religious leaders of our society?

If not, why not?

I do. I support the Catholic Bishop's Stand on Immigation Reform.

-----------------
Interfaith Statement in Support of Comprehensive Immigration Reform

October 18, 2005

We, the undersigned faith-based leaders and organizations, join together to call upon President Bush and our elected officials in Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform legislation that establishes a safe and humane immigration system consistent with our values. Our diverse faith traditions teach us to welcome our brothers and sisters with love and compassion.

The Hebrew Bible tells us: "The strangers who sojourn with you shall be to you as the natives among you, and you shall love them as yourself; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt (Leviticus 19:33-34)." In the New Testament, Jesus tells us to welcome the stranger (cf. Matthew 25:35), for "what you do to the least of my brethren, you do unto me (Matthew 25:40)." The Qur'an tells us that we should “serve God…and do good to…orphans, those in need, neighbors who are near, neighbors who are strangers, the companion by your side, the wayfarer that you meet, [and those who have nothing] (4:36).”

We call for immigration reform because each day in our congregations, service programs, health-care facilities, and schools we witness the human consequences of an outmoded system. We see and hear the suffering of immigrant families who have lost loved ones to death in the desert or immigrants themselves who have experienced exploitation in the workplace or abuse at the hands of unscrupulous smugglers and others. In our view, changes to the U.S. legal immigration system would help put an end to this suffering, which offends the dignity of all human beings.

We call upon our elected officials to enact legislation that includes the following:


An opportunity for hard-working immigrants who are already contributing to this country to come out of the shadows, regularize their status upon satisfaction of reasonable criteria and, over time, pursue an option to become lawful permanent residents and eventually United States citizens;
Reforms in our family-based immigration system to significantly reduce waiting times for separated families who currently wait many years to be reunited;
The creation of legal avenues for workers and their families who wish to migrate to the U.S. to enter our country and work in a safe, legal, and orderly manner with their rights fully protected; and
Border protection policies that are consistent with humanitarian values and with the need to treat all individuals with respect, while allowing the authorities to carry out the critical task of identifying and preventing entry of terrorists and dangerous criminals, as well as pursuing the legitimate task of implementing American immigration policy.
While we support the right of the government to enforce the law and protect the national security interests of the United States, we recognize that our existing complex and unworkable immigration system has made it nearly impossible for many immigrants – who seek to support their families or reunite with loved ones – to achieve legal status. Reforming the immigration system to address this reality would allow the U.S. government to focus its enforcement efforts on real threats that face all Americans – citizens and immigrants alike.
We urge our elected officials to conduct the immigration reform debate in a civil and respectful manner, mindful not to blame immigrants for our social and economic ills or for the atrocities committed by the few who have carried out acts of terrorism. A polarized process that is lacking in civility would hinder deliberative discourse and not serve the best interests of our nation.

As faith-based leaders and organizations, we call attention to the moral dimensions of public policy and pursue policies that uphold the human dignity of each person, all of whom are made in the image of God. We engage the immigration issue with the goal of fashioning an immigration system that facilitates legal status and family unity in the interest of serving the God-given dignity and rights of every individual. It is our collective prayer that the legislative process will produce a just immigration system of which our nation of immigrants can be proud.

Signed by:

National Organizations
Anti-Defamation League
American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
American Jewish Committee
American Jewish Congress
American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA)
B’nai B’rith International
Catholic Health Association
Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC)
Catholic Relief Services
Church World Service/Immigration and Refugee Program
Columban Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation Office
Conference of Major Superiors of Men
Episcopal Church USA
Gamaliel National Clergy Caucus Leadership Council
Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS)
International Catholic Migration Commission
Institute on Religion and Public Policy
Irish Apostolate, USA
Islamic Circle of North America
Jesuit Conference
Jesuit Refugee Service/USA
Jewish Council for Public Affairs
Jewish Reconstructionist Federation
Jubilee Campaign USA
Justice for Our Neighbors Immigration Clinic Network
La Ermita - The Hermitage
Leadership Conference of Women Religious
Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service
Mennonite Central Committee U.S. Washington Office
Mexican American Cultural Center
Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate
National Catholic Association of Diocesan Directors for Hispanic Ministry
National Council of Jewish Women
National Ministries, American Baptist Churches USA
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
Union for Reform Judaism
United Jewish Communities
United Methodist Committee on Relief
United States Province of the Priests of the Sacred Heart
Women In Islam, Inc.
Women’s League for Conservative Judaism
World Relief

Local Organizations
Baltimore Jewish Council
Building Bridges: Hispanic Outreach Project Community of St. Anthony Church in Canton, Ohio
Cabrini Immigrant Services, Dobbs Ferry, New York
Cabrini Immigrant Services, New York, New York
California Province of the Society of Jesus
Capuchin Province of St. Joseph, Detroit, Michigan
Catholic Charities Diocese of Des Moines
Catholic Charities Diocese of San Diego
Catholic Charities Hawaii
Catholic Charities Health and Human Services, Diocese of Cleveland
Catholic Charities Housing Opportunities (CCHO), Youngstown, Ohio
Catholic Charities in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, New Mexico
Catholic Charities in the Diocese of Paterson, New Jersey
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Arlington, Virginia
Catholic Charities of Tennessee, Inc.
Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston, Texas
Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington
Catholic Migration Office of the Diocese of Brooklyn, New York
Catholic Social Services in Anchorage, Alaska
Clerics of St. Viator, Chicago Province
Commonwealth Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Richmond, Virginia
Community Relations Council of the Jewish Federation of San Antonio
Congregation of Holy Cross, Southern Province
Congregation of Our Lady of Victory Missionary Sisters, Huntington, Indiana
Detroit Province of the Society of Jesus
En Camino, Migrant and Immigrant Services, Diocese of Toledo, Ohio
Family Unity & Citizenship Program of the Diocese of Las Cruces
HIAS and Council Migration Services of Philadelphia
Hogar Hispano - Catholic Charities, Falls Church, Virginia
Houston Dominican Sisters
Human Concerns Commission of the Diocese of San Jose
Interfaith Refugee and Immigration Ministries of Illinois
Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action, Boston
Jewish Federation of Greater Middlesex County, New Jersey
Jewish Community Action, St. Paul, Minnesota
Jewish Community Relations Council of the Jewish Federation of Southern Arizona
Lutheran Children and Family Service of Eastern Pennsylvania
Lutheran Family Services in the Carolinas
Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota
Lutheran Social Services of Michigan
Lutheran Social Services of New England
Lutheran Social Services of Northern New England
Lutheran Social Services of South Dakota
Lutheran Social Services of the National Capital Area
Marianist Province of the United States, St. Louis, Missouri
Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty, New York
Migration and Refugee Services Diocese of Trenton, New Jersey
Missionary Sisters of the Immaculate Conception, Province of the Immaculate Conception, Paterson, New Jersey
Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Stella Maris Province, New York, New York
Missionhurst-CICM, Arlington, Virginia
National Catholic Rural Life Conference, Des Moines, Iowa
Northern Indiana Ecumenical Multicultural Ministry (NIEMM), Morocco, Indiana
Organización for Latino Awareness of the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago
Priests of the Sacred Heart (SCJ), Hales Corners, Wisconsin
Provincial Council of the Province of St. John the Baptist of the Order of Friars Minor, Cincinnati, Ohio
River's Edge Community Church, Oella, Maryland
Saints Peter and Paul Church, Savannah, Georgia
Society of Jesus (Jesuits), New York Province
Society of the Divine Word, Chicago Province
St James Faithful Citizenship, Elizabethtown, Kentucky
St James Parish Council, Elizabethtown, Kentucky
St James Parish Social Ministries, Elizabethtown, Kentucky
St. Benedict's Abbey, Benet Lake, Wisconsin
UJA-Federation of New York
Vincentian Center for Church and Society at St. John's University, New York
Washington Buddhist Peace Fellowship (WBPF)
Western Dominican Province, Oakland, California
Wider Church Ministries - United Church of Christ, Cleveland, Ohio
Wisconsin Province of the Society of Jesus

Individual Faith Leaders
Pamela Beech, Archdiocese of Detroit, Lay Leadership and Formation
Most Reverend Gerald R. Barnes, Bishop of San Bernardino
Rev. Dr. Stephen P. Bouman, Bishop, Metropolitan New York Synod, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Rev. Dr. Clive Calver, Walnut Hill Community Church, Bethel, CT
P. Adam Carroll, 9/11 Relief Director Islamic Circle of North America USA (ICNA Relief)
Patrick Gilger, SJ, Loyola University Chicago
Most Reverend Nicholas DiMarzio, Bishop of Brooklyn
John E. Dister, SJ, Detroit Province Jesuits, Loyola of the Lakes Retreat House
Bob Dunden, SJ, St Benedict the Moor Parish, Omaha, NE
John C. Fickes, Detroit Province of the Society of Jesus
Francis Cardinal George, Archbishop of Chicago
Joseph K. Grieboski, President, Institute on Religion and Public Policy
Michael Higgins, C.P., Provincial Superior of Holy Cross Province of the Passionists, Chicago, Illinois
Daniel Idzikowski, Catholic Charities of the Diocese of La Crosse, Inc., La Crosse, Wisconsin
Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh, Port Wentworth, Georgia
Dr Khurshid Khan, President of the Islamic Circle of North America
Most Reverend Gerald Kicanas, Bishop of Tucson
Clifton Kirkpatrick, Stated Clerk of the General Assembly, Presbyterian Church-USA
Abbot Jerome Kodell, OSB, Subiaco, Arkansas
Reverand John S. Korcsmar, CSC, Austin, Texas
Sister Larraine Lauter OSU, Owensboro, Kentucky
Reverend Msgr. Ronald T. Marino, Brooklyn, New York
Peter Vander Meulen, Office of Social Justice and Hunger Action, Christian Reformed Church
Allan Parker, Pastor, Quitman Church of the Nazarene, Quitman, GA
Sylvia Romero, Hispanic Ministry at Grace United Methodist Church, Olathe, Kansas
Rev. Robert J. Scullin, Provincial, Detroit Province of the Society of Jesus
Most Reverend Carlos Sevilla, S.J., Bishop of Yakima, Washington
Secretary General, Rashid Siddiqui, Islamic Circle of North America
Michael Simone, SJ, Weston Jesuit School of Theology
Fr. Tom Smith, Hispanic Ministry of New Albany, Indiana
Most Reverend Jaime Soto, Auxiliary Bishop of Orange, California
Madonna Della Strada, Jesuit Residence
Most Reverend Thomas G. Wenski, Bishop of Orlando
Professor Elie Wiesel, Boston University
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Quote:
 
For those of you who are believers, do you square your political views on immigration with the religious leaders of our society?

If not, why not?


I'm not sure whether or not I do, so I suppose my ideals on immigration reform are independent of religious leaders; they may be the same as mine, or they may not, but I don't look at their views to determine my own.

But if you're going to talk morality, I believe that not only is it in everyone's better interest to work with the demand of both the immigrants and our businesses, I think it's morally "correct". For example (and obviously this is extreme and over-simplified), I'd much prefer setting up some sort of immigrant worker program, than building a wall and getting more guards. If you just look at the good ones who simply want to work and better the lives of their families, I figure, why not help them out, and get something out of it (cheap labor) as well? Again, this is all very fundamental, but it's basically how I field the issue.
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Aqua Letifer
Mar 27 2006, 01:33 PM
Quote:
 
For those of you who are believers, do you square your political views on immigration with the religious leaders of our society?

If not, why not?


I'm not sure whether or not I do, so I suppose my ideals on immigration reform are independent of religious leaders; they may be the same as mine, or they may not, but I don't look at their views to determine my own.

But if you're going to talk morality, I believe that not only is it in everyone's better interest to work with the demand of both the immigrants and our businesses, I think it's morally "correct". For example (and obviously this is extreme and over-simplified), I'd much prefer setting up some sort of immigrant worker program, than building a wall and getting more guards. If you just look at the good ones who simply want to work and better the lives of their families, I figure, why not help them out, and get something out of it (cheap labor) as well? Again, this is all very fundamental, but it's basically how I field the issue.

While I believe, there is the political side to this issue, I also believe there is also the moral and ethical side.

It is very easy to dismiss the 12 million undocument aliens all as criminals. But they remain human beings, to be treated with respect and dignity -- or so my religion teaches me.
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Rick Zimmer
Mar 28 2006, 09:33 AM


It is very easy to dismiss the 12 million undocument aliens all as criminals. But they remain human beings, to be treated with respect and dignity -- or so my religion teaches me.

All human beings -- guilty or innocent -- should be treated with human dignity. However, that does not mean people breaking laws should not be incarcerated or deported or otherwise punished. So my religion teaches and my common sense tells me.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
ivorythumper
Mar 28 2006, 08:44 AM
Rick Zimmer
Mar 28 2006, 09:33 AM


It is very easy to dismiss the 12 million undocument aliens all as criminals.  But they remain human beings, to be treated with respect and dignity -- or so my religion teaches me.

All human beings -- guilty or innocent -- should be treated with human dignity. However, that does not mean people breaking laws should not be incarcerated or deported or otherwise punished. So my religion teaches and my common sense tells me.

Do you accept the principles laid out in the document above, thumps?

The bishops of your Church have overwhelmingly endorsed it.

Do you disagree with them? If so, why?
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Rick Zimmer
Mar 28 2006, 10:54 AM
ivorythumper
Mar 28 2006, 08:44 AM
Rick Zimmer
Mar 28 2006, 09:33 AM


It is very easy to dismiss the 12 million undocument aliens all as criminals.  But they remain human beings, to be treated with respect and dignity -- or so my religion teaches me.

All human beings -- guilty or innocent -- should be treated with human dignity. However, that does not mean people breaking laws should not be incarcerated or deported or otherwise punished. So my religion teaches and my common sense tells me.

Do you accept the principles laid out in the document above, thumps?

The bishops of your Church have overwhelmingly endorsed it.

Do you disagree with them? If so, why?

As a policy statement of a mixed group it seems fine. I am all in favor of immigration reform and humane government. For some reason you seem to assume that I would take exception to the statement. Are there particular passages that you wish to discuss?

PS: It's not "my Church", it's Jesus's. :wink:
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
ivorythumper
Mar 28 2006, 10:05 AM
Rick Zimmer
Mar 28 2006, 10:54 AM
ivorythumper
Mar 28 2006, 08:44 AM
Rick Zimmer
Mar 28 2006, 09:33 AM


It is very easy to dismiss the 12 million undocument aliens all as criminals.  But they remain human beings, to be treated with respect and dignity -- or so my religion teaches me.

All human beings -- guilty or innocent -- should be treated with human dignity. However, that does not mean people breaking laws should not be incarcerated or deported or otherwise punished. So my religion teaches and my common sense tells me.

Do you accept the principles laid out in the document above, thumps?

The bishops of your Church have overwhelmingly endorsed it.

Do you disagree with them? If so, why?

As a policy statement of a mixed group it seems fine. I am all in favor of immigration reform and humane government. For some reason you seem to assume that I would take exception to the statement. Are there particular passages that you wish to discuss?

PS: It's not "my Church", it's Jesus's. :wink:

Sure,

Is the following a policy you advocate? In the other thread, it sounded as if you do not.

"An opportunity for hard-working immigrants who are already contributing to this country to come out of the shadows, regularize their status upon satisfaction of reasonable criteria and, over time, pursue an option to become lawful permanent residents and eventually United States citizens;"

But let me say, I did not post this aimed just at you. There are many believers on this Board who seem to be willing to express their religious convictions on a whole host of issues. I am interesting in hearng where they stand vis-a-vis this interfaith statement.
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Rick Zimmer
Mar 28 2006, 07:27 PM


"An opportunity for hard-working immigrants who are already contributing to this country to come out of the shadows, regularize their status upon satisfaction of reasonable criteria and, over time, pursue an option to become lawful permanent residents and eventually United States citizens;"


I have no issue with that notion.

Evidence of contribution should be paying SS and income tax like the rest of us who enjoy the benefits of the country; carrying auto insurance on the vehicles they own and having them legally registered; not having participated in any criminal activity of any sort; not having obtained any sort of governmental assistance for which they are not entitled or obtained by fraudulent means; etc.

If they have done anything against these sort of standards, that would indicate that they are not hard working contributors and should be deported immediately without chance of return.

I assume you would have no problem with this?
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
ivorythumper
Mar 28 2006, 07:51 PM
Rick Zimmer
Mar 28 2006, 07:27 PM


"An opportunity for hard-working immigrants who are already contributing to this country to come out of the shadows, regularize their status upon satisfaction of reasonable criteria and, over time, pursue an option to become lawful permanent residents and eventually United States citizens;"


I have no issue with that notion.

Evidence of contribution should be paying SS and income tax like the rest of us who enjoy the benefits of the country; carrying auto insurance on the vehicles they own and having them legally registered; not having participated in any criminal activity of any sort; not having obtained any sort of governmental assistance for which they are not entitled or obtained by fraudulent means; etc.

If they have done anything against these sort of standards, that would indicate that they are not hard working contributors and should be deported immediately without chance of return.

I assume you would have no problem with this?

Yes, I have problems with it.

But I assume it is because I did not understand what the Interfaith Statement said.

I have no doubts you have interpreted the intent and the spririt and letter of it correctly.
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Let me make sure I follow you, Rick...... according to you, we are *not* a Christian nation, and you see a "wall" between church and state. But you now are of the opinion that your church's edicts should dictate government policy. Which do you believe, or do you just think *your* church has the right to involve itself in governmental affairs?
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Rick Zimmer
Mar 29 2006, 12:23 AM
ivorythumper
Mar 28 2006, 07:51 PM
Rick Zimmer
Mar 28 2006, 07:27 PM


"An opportunity for hard-working immigrants who are already contributing to this country to come out of the shadows, regularize their status upon satisfaction of reasonable criteria and, over time, pursue an option to become lawful permanent residents and eventually United States citizens;"


I have no issue with that notion.

Evidence of contribution should be paying SS and income tax like the rest of us who enjoy the benefits of the country; carrying auto insurance on the vehicles they own and having them legally registered; not having participated in any criminal activity of any sort; not having obtained any sort of governmental assistance for which they are not entitled or obtained by fraudulent means; etc.

If they have done anything against these sort of standards, that would indicate that they are not hard working contributors and should be deported immediately without chance of return.

I assume you would have no problem with this?

Yes, I have problems with it.

But I assume it is because I did not understand what the Interfaith Statement said.

I have no doubts you have interpreted the intent and the spririt and letter of it correctly.

What's wrong, Rick?

Don't you consider not being a criminal and obeying the laws of the land that they want to be accept in as "reasonable criteria"?
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
ivorythumper
Mar 29 2006, 12:27 AM

What's wrong, Rick?

Don't you consider not being a criminal and obeying the laws of the land that they want to be accept in as "reasonable criteria"?

This thread is about the Interfaith Statement, which I read as one of compassion and recognition of the human dignity of the men and women and children who live among us, values which I believe transcend legal boundaries.

But I have already said my reading it as a statement of compassion and recognition of the human dignity of the undocumented aliens is obviously wrong. You are one who are always very concerned with the meaning and intent of words. I therefore bow to your interpretation of what the words say and mean.

BTW, you never answered my question at the very beginning of this thread. As a Catholic, do you agree with the very clear position of the Catholic Bishops of the United States on legalization? If so, why? If not, why not?
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Rick Zimmer
Mar 29 2006, 07:49 AM
ivorythumper
Mar 29 2006, 12:27 AM

What's wrong, Rick?

Don't you consider not being a criminal and obeying the laws of the land that they want to be accept in as "reasonable criteria"?

This thread is about the Interfaith Statement, which I read as one of compassion and recognition of the human dignity of the men and women and children who live among us, values which I believe transcend legal boundaries.

<snip>
BTW, you never answered my question at the very beginning of this thread. As a Catholic, do you agree with the very clear position of the Catholic Bishops of the United States on legalization? If so, why? If not, why not?

Rick:

Do you want to talk about the Interfaith Statement or do you want to talk about the USCCB's position?

Please make up your mind as you are very quick to decide that other's hijack your threads. I certainly don't want this to become about me, as you accused me of doing in another thread.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Rick:

Although you never answered my question about it, the conversation is worth continuing even if you later accuse me of hijacking your thread.

Given the tone of your question, I wonder precisely what sort of moral authority you think that a USCCB statement on immigration (or any topic) has? And what moral authority do you assume that I ought to give it? For one thing, it is not a universal teaching, or a doctrine of either faith or morals, and is not even part of the “ordinary magisterium” to which a Catholic owes an assent of faith. It is a policy statement not drafted by bishops but rather by their policy wonks in the social justice office. Policy wonks enjoy no magisterial authority.

What does the Church actually say about the topic in the Catechism? First, let’s point out that it is clear from 2420 that the Church considers Herself competent to speak about economic and social matters only “when the fundamental rights of the person or the salvation of souls requires it.” The Catechism draws a clear distinction of her mission from that of the political authorities and is concerned with temporalities in so far as they are related to our salvation. You might make an argument how my political decision has a bearing on matters of the fundamental rights of persons or the salvation of souls, although you don’t seem to want to entertain that argument when discussing the politics of abortion. But again, there you have it.

Also, it is worth noting in 2442 that “It is not the role of the Pastors of the Church to intervene directly in the political structuring and organization of social life” – that is the role of the laity. So it seems rather overstepping for the USCCB to be instructing Catholics to vote for particular bills or to oppose particular bills as they do on their website.

Now, you seem to think that the Church has a "very clear position" on immigration. It does not seem to be nearly as clear as, say, the Church’s position on artificial contraception which you have yet to explain adequately why you disagree with or think it unimportant, but there you have it.

In my reading of the topic, the Church does not have a very clear position on immigration, other than to set down some general guidelines, and it simply cannot have a specific teaching about whether any specific country ought to have any specific laws regarding immigration.

The Catechism does speak a bit about immigration, but nothing that I can find on illegal, or unauthorized, immigration (which is what this thread is about).
Quote:
 
2241 The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.
Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants' duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.

Note that immigrants have an explicit obligation to obey the laws of their adoptive countries. You seem to think that is not important. “[c]arrying civic burdens” such as paying taxes and contributing to social security are also required, but again you seem to think this is not important. (And if I am misunderstanding your position, please do clarify it for me).

What is most important for the conversation at hand is that the USCCB is explicitly against illegal immigration since:
Quote:
 
(1) it is contrary to federal law and (2) it is not good either for society, because of the presence of a large population living outside the community, or the migrant, who is subjected to abuse, exploitation, and even death.


Yet strangely they are opposed to a proposed bill (H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Anti-Terrorism, and Illegal Immigration Protection Act of 2005) that would
Quote:
 
require mandatory detention of all aliens apprehended along the U.S. border, including children and families;
What it the point of being against illegal immigration of they oppose the enforcement of the law?

The UCCCB also claim that they don't support open borders, and teach that a sovereign government has the right to control its border:
Quote:
 
No, Church teaching supports the right of the sovereign nation to control its borders. This is necessary to ensure the common good. Enforcement of our borders, however, should include the protection of the basic human rights and dignity of the migrant and not place lives at risk.

But again, if they are opposed to detention of people attempting to pass through the border illegally, then they are not really supporting the rights of the government to control the borders or to protect the common good.

In fact, mandatory detention upon apprehension would undoubtedly decrease the risks to illegal aliens as they could be provided with food, water, shelter, and a trip back home safely.

The USCCB's notion that
Quote:
 
The creation of a temporary worker program with protections and more family reunification visas will help stem illegal immigration by providing legal avenues for migration.
is naive, unless it allows for a "come one, come all" open border policy. I supposed one could argue that such a policy might reduce the flow of "illegal immigrants" just because they would now be “legal” -- but who is going to fund the massive apparatus for largely illiterate populations from Mexico and Central America to apply for work visas and do the background checks on everyone? How could you possibly create the sort of bureaucracy necessary for that task? (Oh, I forgot, the liberals are very adept at creating massive bureaucracies that don't care about the efficient use of tax payers dollars). ;)

Now, perhaps I’ve misread the documents, and I’d be happy if you could obfuscate illuminate the relevant passages for me. As far as I can tell, however, the USCCB has no well thought out and developed statement on illegal immigration and is on record as being positively against it..

I think that to care for the illegal immigrants is a positively good thing, and indeed a corporal work of mercy, but that is the role of individuals. It is the government’s role to maintain the common good, which includes the enforcement of the rule of law.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
IT,

Quote:
 
I think that to care for the illegal immigrants is a positively good thing, and indeed a corporal work of mercy, but that is the role of individuals. It is the government’s role to maintain the common good, which includes the enforcement of the rule of law.


How about if enforcement of the law does not contribute (significantly) to the public good? I suppose you could argue whether or not this applies to immigration, but just in a general sense, I think this is how law officers practice enforcement; in a "choose their battles" kind of way.
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
Missing from Rick's list is the SBC, which is the largest Protestant denomination in the United States.

Being baptists, they would probably leave this political decision up the individual members.

Catholics, however, have a very vested interest in letting as many Mexicans/Latinos stay in the country as possible, illegal, or otherwise...
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
ivorythumper
Mar 30 2006, 11:38 PM
Rick:

Although you never answered my question about it, the conversation is worth continuing even if you later accuse me of hijacking your thread.

etc.

thumps,

I did not respond because I sensed you were getting frustrated and, to be honest, I did not want to further that. Sometimes I like to, but this has been a good week and I saw no reason to enjoy your discomfort. :smile:

What moral authority do I give to the USCCB's pronouncements and pastoral letters? The local bishops and the national bishops coferences are given authority to teach. As a Catholic I have to obligation to listen and be taught -- but clearly they do not have anything close to dogmatic authoirty. One can in good conscience differ, but one cannot simply shrug one's shoulders as if their statements are meaningless.

I believe such teachings, as well as all teachings of the Church, should inform a Catholic's political and social views, even if they cannot and should not be used to mandate them.

I understand what you are saying but I think you fail to make the distinction between two very distinct issues. The first is the right of a sovereign country to control its borders. The second issue is what to do with 12 million people in this country when this country has not been controllings its borders.

The Church's teachings clearly focus more on the second than on the first and on the need to provide humane treatment reflecting the dignity of the human beings involved. To me, this is part of the overall call of the Church to respect life and is just as important an aspect of respecting life as being anti-abortion.

When I read comments such as yours, arguing more strongly in favor of national borders than the people involved and supporting legislation which would define and treat them as felons rather than as human beings who are seeking a better life for themselves and their families, I wonder where in Catholic teachings or the Scriptures one finds support for such views.

Where does a Catholic find support in the Church's teachings for designating people who are seeking to better their lives as felons?

Where does a Catholic find support in the Church's teachings rounding up 12 million people, detaining them in jails, and then forcing mass deportations?

Where does a Catholic find support in Chuch teachings for denying social services for these people?

Each of these are incorporated in HR 4337.

Yes, the Church recognizes the right of a nation to control its borders. But even more importantly and more fundamentally, the Church recognizes the rights of all human beings to be treated with respect and dignity. The American Church further recognizes that the fact we have 12 million undocumented aliens in this country is as much the doing of the United States as it is of the people whose sole crime is walking across a politically defined line in order to better their lives.

You may wish to read A Pastoral Letter Concerning Migratrion issued jointly by the Catholic Bishops of Mexico and the United States, which grows out of and is based on the teachings of the Universal Church as enucniated in the Catechism you quote as well as grounded in Papal encyclicals, statements and the traditon of the Church.

I believe this Pastoral Letter appropriately and fully addresses both of the issues -- the right of the United States to control its borders as well the the responsibility to treat those here with the dignity their humanity demands.

There is little in this Pastoral Letter which I find fault with. While it is long, I think it is worthy of consideration by Catholics and non-Catholics, believers and non-believers alike when considering these two separate, but clearly related issues, during this current debate.

A Pastoral Letter Concerning Migration
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Aqua Letifer
Mar 31 2006, 09:18 AM
IT,

Quote:
 
I think that to care for the illegal immigrants is a positively good thing, and indeed a corporal work of mercy, but that is the role of individuals. It is the government’s role to maintain the common good, which includes the enforcement of the rule of law.


How about if enforcement of the law does not contribute (significantly) to the public good? I suppose you could argue whether or not this applies to immigration, but just in a general sense, I think this is how law officers practice enforcement; in a "choose their battles" kind of way.

If the enforcement of a law does not promote the common good, then the law itself must no promote the common good, in which case it seems to be a bad or dubious law.

In general I am not in favor of a lot of strict legislation, which is much more vulnerable to draconian enforcement, restrictions of human freedom, trampling on rights and dignity,etc. Laws ought to be framed in due proportion to the maintenance of the common good.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Jolly
Mar 31 2006, 09:51 AM
Catholics, however, have a very vested interest in letting as many Mexicans/Latinos stay in the country as possible, illegal, or otherwise...

I disagree with that. One could as well argue that as long as the WASPs and liberals are contracepting themselves out of existence, those groups might have a vested interest in restricting immigration of traditional, religious, conservative, fertile, dark people. :wink:
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Rick Zimmer
Mar 31 2006, 10:20 AM



I understand what you are saying but I think you fail to make the distinction between two very distinct issues.  The first is the right of a sovereign country to control its borders.  The second issue is what to do with 12 million people in this country when this country has not been controllings its borders.


That is precisely what I am not failing to distinguish. I never said anything about deporting them all. In fact, I agreed with you about the language of "hard-working immigrants who are already contributing to this country to come out of the shadows, regularize their status upon satisfaction of reasonable criteria and, over time, pursue an option to become lawful permanent residents and eventually United States citizens."

The critics of the bill are the ones who summarily ignore the first point of border control, and provide for NO solution of what to do with the 12 million. What exactly do you proposed that we do with them? Allow them ALL to stay, or provide some mechanism whereby they are processed to ascertain whether or not they are hardworking contributors? This second process is precisely what HR4437 seems to be aiming at.


Quote:
 


The Church's teachings clearly focus more on the second than on the first and on the need to provide humane treatment reflecting the dignity of the human beings involved.  To me, this is part of the overall call of the Church to respect life and is just as important an aspect of respecting life as being anti-abortion. 


The Church's teaching does not focus more on the second than the first. If you are talking about the USCCB's position they make it clear that they are opposed to illegal immigration precisely on the grounds that a nation has a right to control it's borders. The Church never allows for violations of human dignity, but I have never seen any language that suggests the deporting illegal aliens is a violation of human dignity. Nor do I think it is a violation of human dignity. If a homeless person decides to camp out in your back yard, would you have them removed, or allow them to stay because removing them would be a violation of their human dignity?

Quote:
 

When I read comments such as yours, arguing more strongly in favor of national borders than the people involved and supporting legislation which would define and treat them as felons rather than as human beings who are seeking a better life for themselves and their families, I wonder where in Catholic teachings or the Scriptures one finds support for such views. 

Where does a Catholic find support in the Church's teachings for designating people who are seeking to better their lives as felons?

Where does a Catholic find support in the Church's teachings rounding up 12 million people, detaining them in jails, and then forcing mass deportations?

Where does a Catholic find support in Chuch teachings for denying social services for these people?

Each of these are incorporated in HR 4337.

Your language is tendentious (big surprise). There are perfectly legitimate avenues for people looking to better their lives to immigrate. I suspect that if economic forces really do dictate things, then rather than the brain drain we encourge, we'll also be having a brawn drain and increase the numbers of lower class, uneducated people to work the fields and hotels and labor intensive industries, like the old Braceros program, and with better supervision to avoid the exploitation that occurred.


Please look at HR 4437 Here is the Summary Statement of the bill. I see none of what you claim.

There does not seem to be any redefinition of illegal aliens per se as felons. There are significantly stiffer penalties for profiteers who abuse and endanger people seeking to gain entrance. I think it foolish to increase the maximum jail time for illegal aliens -- I see no reason to incarcerate anyone on a first offense. They should be photographed, finger printed, DNA'd, and returned to their country of origin. If they attempt again to enter they should be incarcerated. Do you have a problem with that?

There does not seem to be any provision for automatic deportation. Sec 122 for instance allows for reassignment of status to permanent resident after due diligence (background checks,etc). Do you have a problem with that?

All of the language of Sec 202 related to criminal activity seems to pertain to traffickers of illegal aliens, and those who exploit them -- not those who provide social assistance. Furthermore, I see nothing in the bill that denies social services to aliens, providing that they are not fraudulently obtained.

I saw nothing of mass deportations, or of felonizing--in fact, Sect 203.4.f states "(f)
Quote:
 
For purposes of this section, the term `attempts to enter' refers to the general intent of the alien to enter the United States and does not refer to the intent of the alien to violate the law.'.


Those who are here illegally have, at some point, to come out of the shadows on their own -- even at the risk of deportation -- to come under the scrutiny of Immigration. This is not an amnesty policy -- which has been seen to be a terrible idea -- but rather an opportunity for those hard working contributors to make their case as to why they should be allowed to stay here and be granted permanent residence. Why do you have a problem with that?

Quote:
 

Yes, the Church recognizes the right of a nation to control its borders.  But even more importantly and more fundamentally, the Church recognizes the rights of all human beings to be treated with respect and dignity.  The American Church further recognizes that the fact we have 12 million undocumented aliens in this country is as much the doing of the United States as it is of the people whose sole crime is walking across a politically defined line in order to better their lives.


I don't know what you mean by the American Church. I am only concerned about the Catholic Church in America.

But it is absurd to assign responsibility to the US for having illegal aliens. Even if you leave your front door unlocked, no one has a right to enter your house and steal your stereo, and the theft of the stereo would not be in any way "your doing".

Quote:
 

You may wish to read A Pastoral Letter Concerning Migratrion issued jointly by the Catholic Bishops of Mexico and the United States, which grows out of and is based on the teachings of the Universal Church as enucniated in the Catechism you quote as well as grounded in Papal encyclicals, statements and the traditon of the Church.

I believe this Pastoral Letter appropriately and fully addresses both of the issues -- the right of the United States to control its borders as well the the responsibility to treat those here with the dignity their humanity demands.

There is little in this Pastoral Letter which I find fault with.  While it is long, I think it is worthy of consideration by Catholics and non-Catholics, believers and non-believers alike when considering these two separate, but clearly related issues, during this current debate.

A Pastoral Letter Concerning Migration


I had already read the letter before I responded. It is not a bad letter and worthy of reflection.

I am all in favor of the Government treating everyone with dignity. In the most dignified manner, intercept illegals as the try to cross the border, process them, and return them to their homelands. If they attempt to reenter, pop them in jail for a year.

For those who are already here and have established some sort of basically good and healthy life (no insurance fraud, paying taxes, no criminal activity, etc), then allow them to register, do the due diligence, if they check out fine then allow them temp work visas or even permanent resident status, allow them to reunite with their families, etc. If they don't past muster then boot their criminal asses out of the country with the understanding that if they try to reenter illegally they will serve very long prison sentences. Do you have a problem with that?
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
ivorythumper
Mar 31 2006, 01:06 PM
Jolly
Mar 31 2006, 09:51 AM
Catholics, however, have a very vested interest in letting as many Mexicans/Latinos stay in the country as possible, illegal, or otherwise...

I disagree with that. One could as well argue that as long as the WASPs and liberals are contracepting themselves out of existence, those groups might have a vested interest in restricting immigration of traditional, religious, conservative, fertile, dark people. :wink:

What is the numerical make-up of the American Catholic church in total numbers of caucasians, and % of members who are caucasian? Or black, for that matter?

Latinos are overwhelmingly Catholic, and since they also tend to be more fundamental in theology, tend to have larger families when compared to protestants, or the non-churched.

For the Catholic Church to not experience the decline seen in Europe, the church needs the Hispanics...which in turn can most definitely influence church policy.
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Jolly
Apr 1 2006, 09:08 AM
For the Catholic Church to not experience the decline seen in Europe, the church needs the Hispanics...which in turn can most definitely influence church policy.

Church?

Politics?

Related?

Noooo!!!!!

:popcorn:
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Jolly
Apr 1 2006, 08:08 AM
ivorythumper
Mar 31 2006, 01:06 PM
Jolly
Mar 31 2006, 09:51 AM
Catholics, however, have a very vested interest in letting as many Mexicans/Latinos stay in the country as possible, illegal, or otherwise...

I disagree with that. One could as well argue that as long as the WASPs and liberals are contracepting themselves out of existence, those groups might have a vested interest in restricting immigration of traditional, religious, conservative, fertile, dark people. :wink:

What is the numerical make-up of the American Catholic church in total numbers of caucasians, and % of members who are caucasian? Or black, for that matter?

Latinos are overwhelmingly Catholic, and since they also tend to be more fundamental in theology, tend to have larger families when compared to protestants, or the non-churched.

For the Catholic Church to not experience the decline seen in Europe, the church needs the Hispanics...which in turn can most definitely influence church policy.

1) It's not a numbers game
2) In Christ there is no Jew or Greek, Hispanic or Anglo.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
And there is no such thing as church politics, or the lust for power within any given denomination?

:rolleyes:
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Politics and lust for power are in the hearts and minds of the individuals and are not systemic. It's all about conversion, and service to others in imitation of Christ, not about power. Of course these things get corrupted, but only when the members don't follow the teachings of the faith. I'm not sure about what you real point is.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1