Illegal aliens are predominantly NOT religious refugees, nor political refugees. All human need, I agree, can be evaluated in terms of Christ and/or the Holy Family, but you exclude any respect for our laws of this nation.

The Constitution of the U.S.A. defines our democracy by “the rule of law.” We abandon that, we abandon our democracy.

And our laws are not “inhumane” or “not Christian” for the most part. In theory, most of what our nation represents is well integrated with Christian theology. But to suggest that laws should be abandoned due to needy people being “hungry” and therein like the Holy Family, is fine as to your own religious beliefs, but it does not justify violating our laws if you literally “just” disagree with them.

If any individual wants to sponsor anyone else from other nations as to legal immigration, there’s nothing stopping them (or you) from doing so. You can guarantee them a place to live (with you), guarantee that they’ll be fed and housed and employed (with or by you), you can pay them to here and then pay for their language instructions and studies as to U.S. civics so that they can apply for citizenship. Nothing prevents any U.S. citizen from sponsoring others as to legal immigration.

However, what you’re suggesting is that the NATION provide for illegal aliens (I don’t read that you’re stepping up to do so, but if you are, great), and that’s a Marxist politic. The “nation” is nothing more than citizens, and citizens as taxpayers and voters in respect of our laws.

The U.S. isn’t a Good Ship Lollipop that can continually and without limits allow any and all who may want to get on the boat. Eventually, the supplies run out, the boat sinks, everyone perishes. I believe that our laws are the basis of organizing the proper use of the nation (as to us being a “boat” in this analogy). Few would argue that reducing the U.S.A. to another depleted nation in peril by overpopulation, bad planning and legal chaos, political anarchy, would be a good idea as to solving the needs of the world’s needy.

P.S.: I’m curious as to you commenting here via an email IPA. Are you a participant in an email network for Democrat activists? I also note your “healthcare” associated email IPA, which is similar to several others who have written Liberal, pro-Democratic Party (all from “healthcare” associated organizations as to originating IPAs) comments here.

But as to Democrats, that you are supporting a political party that has “abortion on demand,” and by taxpayer funding, as a part of it’s political platform (among other objectionables) tends to dissipate any credibility in my view as to you referencing the Holy Family as example of justifying illegal immigration.

People who are “hungry” don’t get to eat your family members (or anyone else’s) and be accepted or encouraged in doing so just because they’re hungry. On sheer terms of CIVILIZATION alone (even disregarding Christian theology), there are requirements as to who is human and who is not. Homo Sapiens (us) are all animals (we’re a species among the animal life on this planet) yet there are some behaviors that MOST human beings reject and reprimand and punish because those behaviors are loathesome to others.

Theft, lying, general deceit and manipulations (sneaky theft, misleading others with intention due to individual “need” that rejects social and cultural definitions and requirements) are punished by most human civilizations BECAUSE THEY ARE LOATHESOME TO MOST and in that, run contrary to the core of what people define as civilization.

Our laws in the U.S. define our nation, are our general “rules” that define our United States of America as what it is: a nation self-governing, a civilization with definitions and requirements.

Let’s put this very simply: you have a car, someone else “needs” your car, they steal it, are they then justified in stealing the car? Does their theft get a “pass GO” card from God as to His commandments? If he does not believe in God, is the thief not stealing and therefore not deserving of any reprimand as to his theft?

I don’t dislike nor reject what the Pope has to say, nor said in his tour of the U.S.A. on the East Coast recently. I love and admire Pope Benedict. I do not love and admire nor attempt to rationalize taking good intents by the Pope, the Vatican, and then manipulating those good intents and good statements to rationalize violating basic (very basic, even by the Commandments) commands by God as to how we human beings are to behave. And I knew — * I KNEW * — that persons such as yourself would USE what Pope Benedict has said to rationalize Marxist, Socialist, political and social “need based” behaviors as to U.S. security and immigration requirements.

The Catholic Church (previous Pope’s opinions) says that people are free to migrate as they chose. BUT the Church (neither past nor present Pope) “commands” nations to lay down their laws and allow whoever, whenever, to roam (or “migrate”) over, into, through various laws, civil requirements, national boundaries.

In fact, the Catholic Catechism DECLARES: it calls on hosts to welcome immigrants to the extent they are able but it also calls upon the immigrants to respect and integrate themselves into their new nation’s culture, respect the heritage of that nation, obey its laws and be good citizens.

The Catholic Church (by way of the Catechism) does not call anyone to allow anyone else to pummel them just because some thinks they “need” what someone else has. To respect and love onesself is a requirement of God, as also our neighbor, but God does not call us to love our neighbor but hate and ruin oursself.

Part of self respect is caring for who one is and what one has, using it judiciously. If the U.S. throws open all borders and laws and just allows anyone and everyone to enter and remain (and USE) our nation at will, what hope for a future civilization have we? And same goes for other nations worldwide.

The U.S.A. is already far more generous as to allowing ongoing immigration and providing huge amounts of aid and assistance to “needy” nations worldwide. We, in fact, have an ongoing high degree of immigration (legal process) that is then abused by “needy” people from anywhere without too much to any regard for what is good for the U.S. in their efforts to satiate what they deem is good for them individually (anarchist, if not criminal behavior at it’s worst).

The Catholic Church is not calling the U.S. to just allow any “need” to be explored by anyone using the U.S. Yet, of course, Socialist and Marxist individuals attempt to justify that degree of damaging exploitation of our nation and it’s population (and laws) to justify both condemmning the U.S. and in further exploiting it.

Education isn’t so much the separating factor as to who behaves responsibly and who does not. Ethics and morals are a reflection of character, not of an educational level. The cultures that produce the largest percentages of illgal aliens in the U.S. are (1.) Hispanic/Latino nations and (2.) nations where Catholic Bishops and the Church maintain a presence. So there is REASONABLE inquiry there as to what responsibilities the Church actually has IN APPLICATION and involvement in those civilizations as to the moral character of those civilizations, such as they are. There seems to me to be a need for the Church to be addressing the moral failings in those civilizations that encourages a disrespect for the U.S.A. to the extent that many from those civilizations bear little moral hesitation in exploiting the U.S.A. via illegal immigration.

And a hungry person is not exempt from moral and ethical requirements.

And the nations you describe as being “corrupt” in governments are the product of those people you allege are “hungry” and somehow justified in abandoning accordingly. They have a responsibility to change the nations they’ve built (or their forefathers did) and to not be hungry, and to exercise a certain Christian (if they are Christian) morality in going about buidling a civilization that does not produce “hungry” (and uneducated, as you also allege) people by the millions (or in any quantity).

The U.S.A. is under no oblgiation to allow ruination of moral, ethical, legal dimensions of our society to further accommodate anarchy from people demanding their “needs” be met (because they are not being met in their home nations) — one wonders why they’re yelling NOW and didn’t take correction actions years ago, to change their own conditions, the nations they built or allowed to be built right in their own neighborhoods.

Cuba, Haiti, Mexico and Nicauragua are prime examples of former civilizations that have descended into utter anarchy by way of increased tolerance of crime, of degenerating standards among individuals by routinely compromising moral, ethical (and governmental) standards. It’s indicative of utter breakdown of human society in many aspects of all of those nations, and has existed there for years. Same as to areas in Africa.

The world sends food and clothing and builds them houses and buys them schools, hospitals, medical care and more…yet they exploit the very helps given. So the problems originate and exist WITHIN THE CULTURES and are not visited upon them by invading forces from outside Mexico, Haiti, Cuba, etc. These are human beings by population who barely resemble human civilizations.

The Church needs to devote greater effort to hold offending human groups such as in those areas responsible for their own liaibilities. Sending those liabilities to the U.S.A. (as Mexico has done, as Cuba has done and continues to try to do) is no solution, and as Christians, when people illegallly enter and exploit the U.S.A. accordingly, they bear little relationship to Christ when their complaints, as in your case here, are political in nature and the goals appear to be to ruin the U.S.A. inorder to satiate “needs” from other corrupt groups.

On April 18th, 2008 at 1:23 pm, jlibertarian said:
Being welcoming to immigrants and treating illegals humanely doesn’t mean you have to have a chaotic open border. Immigration control isn’t punitive, it brings order, security and fairness. So people shouldn’t interpret the Holy Father’s comments as an endorsement of open borders or as a slap at a border fence.