My favorite:
This moral voice, however, mustn't be one-sided. Just as every immigrant has a right to be treated with dignity, every government has the right and obligation to regulate immigration to sustainable levels, for the good of its own citizens and its immigrants. Religious leaders should be saying this too, don't you think? Why aren't they? Some are.
What a load? So God will not take a stand is what he's basically saying.
1 Peter 2:13 “Submit yourself to every ordinance of man . . . to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors.”
Matthew 22:21 “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's.”
I'm not even sure what he's saying here. Preventing people from entering illegally is not equivelant to abusing or enslaving another human.
If anything, its those encouraging illegal crossings - or at least those with no respect for the rule of law - that are allowing the squalid conditions, if such exists, for the illegal immigrant.
Not every church denomination and/or congregation with those denomination is fully supportive of unfettered immigration.
I will say that American RCC’s need to make a louder voice in opposition as most illegals are RCC and do most of the protesting and safe sanctuary stuff.
Of course! Just ask Mike “Open-Borders-for-Jesus” Huckabee.
Why would God take a stand? Didn’t He already know what was/is going to happen? Isn’t what happens, part of His plan?
No.
God has bigger things to deal with. ;-)
But given a church's spiritual and humanitarian role, it is right and understandable that it speaks out with special force against the miserable conditions of the immigrants whom companies and governments are utilizing for economic gain.In that case, the churches should all be squarely opposed to illegal immigration which, in and of itself, fosters and enables those miserable conditions to exist.
The Mexican government is using illegal invasion of the U.S. as a solution to its poverty and poor government and using illegal invaders as an income source.
The Bush Administration is using illegal invaders to support his globalist buddies and their domestic corporate cadres who are thirsting for the same kind of cheap exploitable labor here that their counterparts enjoy in Red China and other third world ratholes.
The Democrats view illegal invaders the same way they view inner city voters - an exploitable ignorant resource to generate votes and consequently more social programs and bureaucracy with which to reward their cronies with well-paying meaningless unproductive jobs.
The priest is saying that a lot of these "tools" are just human beings trying to improve their lives and we should recognize that, as well as recognize that we have an equal responsibility to enforce rational immigration and border laws - all of which Jorge, the Rats and the Mexican plutocrats ignore.
“What a load? So God will not take a stand is what he’s basically saying. “
Well, that’s an improvement from what some of the bishops were saying. This is a ‘walkback’. The bishops in 2006, in particular liberal bishops like in LA (Bishop Mahoney), made noises about the need for amnesty as an act of compassion to the illegal aliens.
It didnt work. It was wrong. It ignored the impact (negative) that illegal immigration has on low-wage workers, the impact on communities in social cost, etc. We cannot have out-of-control immigration, and amnesty would have made it worse. Lost in the argument was the case for an orderly immigration system that treats (legal) immigrants with respect. Lost in the argument was the fact that immigrants are hurt too by illegal immigration.
“Social conservatives and liberals alike would be wise to re-examine their approach to our present crisis of illegal immigration. God is on the side of human rights and also on the side of legality and security. It is our problem if we choose one over the other and pretend that we are righteous.”
This is a very helpful statement, in that in brings some Catholic church voices that want a balance in how they approach this. If the Church either steps out of the politics, or at least acknowledges the need for legality and security, then they will not and cannot be for unbalanced amnesty proposals.
Summary: This column is a liberal ‘white flag’ - “we give up on the amnesty, we need a balanced approach”
PS “And wouldn’t it be refreshing to hear from a Republican pundit that no love for law or security is ever a valid excuse for treating people like animals, or slaves?”
Let me be the first to say this - no love for law or security is a valid excuse for treating people like slaves.
ping
NO!! God tells us ALL to "be obedient to the laws of the land, and to submit to authority!" There is NO WAY He would ever ask ANY Americans/churches to break the law! Obedience to God is demanded and found many times throughout the Bible.
Look past the banners to see which churches support illegal immigration and you will find churches who have ulterior motives. Usually, it's about money!
Here's a few Scriptures where God admonishes us to be obedient to the laws/leaders of the land. He, of course, is the supreme law!
Ro 13:1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
Ro 13:2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
bttt