George Will makes one good point.
...“Well, I think Kirsten’s largely right,” Will responded. “I think we
ought to say to these children, ‘Welcome to America. You’re going to go
to school and get a job and become Americans. We have 3,141 counties in
this country. That’d be 20 per county.”
“The idea that we can’t assimilate these 8-year-old criminals with
their teddy bears is preposterous,” the conservative columnist went on...
Let's go further and make the cutoff at 13-year-olds.
But none older than that. Zero. Zip. Nada.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
Not that the Bible instructs us to love those who are strangers among us. Was there an age limit on that?
Note this: 'the Bible' did not say that The Gummint should 'welcome the stranger.'
So here's a deal: I'll welcome the 8-year old. YOU welcome the MS-13 drug lord.
Send them all home with the proper immigration documents and an interview date to be conducted at the nearest US embassy or consulate in their home country. I have no problem sending each of them home in business coach with a soccer ball AND a teddy bear. They can await their immigration determination at home just as easily as they can wait for it in the US. The notion that we MUST accept them simply because they're children and they're here already is absurd.
By that logic we should all just send our children to squat some property in Chenequa and gain permanent residence simply because they've successfully trespassed. Not likely to be an easy sell.
Also as someone who brought family members here legally, legal immirants must have sponsors and must not access public benefits for 5 years. Refugees get benefits immediately plus housing and food. Legal immigrants cannot be public charges. How unfair it is to everyone who came here legally.
"Note this: 'the Bible' did not say that The Gummint should 'welcome the stranger.'"
You really need to consult your Bible.
Jesus reiterates the Old Testament command to love and care for the stranger--which incorporates citizens of a nation and their government entities--a criterion by which we shall be judged: "For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me" (Mt 25:35).
You're simply making up your assertion that "...[it] incorporates...their government entities."
Standard Lefty delusion, might I add. It's the 'structures of sin' argument which is a fallacy. Sin is proper to individuals.
Anony 7/29 1:05 has it right. You are wrong.
Saint John Paul II said that immigrants need to respect the laws of the country they are immigrating to. Our citizens will suffer if they cannot afford to pay for other countries' citizens. It is a two-way street. We accept 1 million legal immigrants per year and just can't afford to take in more people especially ones who have no skills or will become public charges. Sponsors insure that legal immigrants will learn English and have an adequate transition.
"It's the 'structures of sin' argument which is a fallacy. Sin is proper to individuals."
Individuals, yes, who become part of the government and, if Christian, are sworn to uphold the tenets of the Bible. Try again.
Umnnhh...no.
They swear to uphold the Constitution. Not the Declaration.
So fuggedabout your inane "Jesus said" argument.
Your turn, boy.
Christians who are in gummint abide first and foremost to Christ. Two weeks ago, Pope Francis stated "this humanitarian emergency requires, as a first urgent measure, these children be welcomed and protected. These measures, however, will not be sufficient, unless they are accompanied by policies that inform people about the dangers of such a journey and, above all, that promote development in their countries of origin."
So while it is a moral necessity to improve the internal conditions of those countries sending their chillun's off to a foreign land, it is also a moral imperative to ensure their safety.
Your turn, Cochise.
Christians who are in gummint abide first and foremost to Christ.
Likely the most naive or most laughable remark you've ever made. You also have problems with using English properly, not that that's a surprise.
Regardless of that little problem, let's examine what I said in the post. Concurring with Will's remarks, I extended them to include all chilluns up to the age of 13.
If they're older than 12, we give 'em clothes, get 'em healthy, feed 'em, and send them home.
You'll notice that NONE of that contradicts either the words of Christ, nor of the current Pope.
Now as to 'sinful' humans: I nominate all the mamas and poppas who banished their children to a foreign land. Moreover, it's clear as crystal to any thinking person that the Pope's remarks about 'promoting development' pertain specifically to Gummint authorities--but not in the USA.
So lecture all THOSE "Christians", dope.
We accept more legal immigrants than any country in the world. I prefer St. John Paul's argument that the immigrant must follow the laws of the nation. We cannot neglect our citizens and take in countless citizens especially refugees who immediately qualify for EBT cards and housing. Our own citizens will suffer. Welcoming the stranger doesn't involve bankrupting and hurting your own citizens. Plus, we still have a legal system where anyone, my family especially, has to follow the rules or we are criminally charged as sponsors. Anyone who gets off a plane from another country has to have a passport. Why are we giving special treatment to people who don't have to fly to get here.
"If they're older than 12, we give 'em clothes, get 'em healthy, feed 'em, and send them home."
There is no "cut-off" age for Christians to deny extended assistance and to break up families, nor is it moral to tacitly endorse their suffering when they are shipped out when the opportunity exists to save their souls. Sinner!
"You'll notice that NONE of that contradicts either the words of Christ, nor of the current Pope."
No, but it doesn't carry out their commands to the letter. Sinner!
"Now as to 'sinful' humans: I nominate all the mamas and poppas who banished their children to a foreign land."
Jesus helped people breaking law and helped those who sinned; in fact, he urged the lame man to break the authorities’ law. By telling this Jewish man to take up his mat and walk, Jesus was making the man a collaborator in his crime (Jn. 5:8-12). Our ultimate allegiance must be to Jesus. His judgment concerning our eternal citizenship will matter most in the end.
I published your last remarks to make clear your puerile understanding of Christianity.
They're good for a laugh now and then. Thanks!
In an expanding country starved for labor, immigration grows the country and contributes to prosperity. In a country in recession with high levels of unemployed labor, immigration is an added burden. No country can maintain a perpetual state of immigration because its resources are finite.
Yes, but as another John Mitchell pointed out, this is not merely an economics question. <13-y-o people are not labor-force factors.
However, 'resource availability' does play a part here. We are in 'prudential' territory on that question.
"I published your last remarks to make clear your puerile understanding of Christianity."
It really chafes you a publik screwels graduate comprehends the Bible more distinctly than a Marquette University graduate. Figure out the lesson that utterly destroys the point you make in your post.
Jesus scandalized the Pharisees by healing on the Sabbath. How dare He even request the healed man to rise up and carry his mat.
Jeremiah 17:21 states: “Thus says the Lord: For the sake of your lives, take care that you do not bear a burden on the Sabbath day or bring it in by the gates of Jerusalem. And do not carry a burden out of your houses on the Sabbath or do any work, but keep the Sabbath day holy, as I commanded your ancestors.”
Jesus did not argue with the Pharisees interpretation. Instead, he emphasized the most important principle. The Law of Love trumps the particulars of the Law and the Prophets.
You really need to attend church more often.
It really chafes you a publik screwels graduate comprehends the Bible more distinctly...
1) The Catholic rests on Scripture AND Tradition. You're not Catholic, so at best you get half the story.
2) Don't have to advertise your schooling, as your understanding of English words is practically nil.
That is slander, Dad29. You have until noon Wednesday to retract, or I am filing a lawsuit.
Boots quaking.
Ooohhhhh. Scare me!!
You're a zit on a frog's ass. Take THAT to court.
Time is up, Dad. I'm suing you and Rick Esenberg over at Shark and Shepherd. He's slandered me repeatedly in the last few days.
I'll bring the popcorn
Laugh all you want, jerk.
You will not be when the process server comes knocking.
Post a Comment