Posted on 09/29/2014 8:03:02 AM PDT by walford
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) said Wednesday that any distinction between illegal immigrants and those who obey U.S. laws and enter the country legally “doesn't exist.”
CNSNews asked the Arizona Democrat, who supports a movement by a growing number of churches to provide sanctuary for illegal aliens facing deportation, what he would say to those who entered the U.S. legally.
"That the issue here is about family," Grijalva replied. "That the issue here is that the people that are seeking the support and the protection of sanctuary are people that are hard-working, families, blended family many times, with citizens and children, and this is not about an issue of some people deserve it, some people don't.
About Us Subscribe Contact Us Donate RSS
Home » News Rep. Grijalva: Distinction Between Legal, Illegal Immigrants ‘Doesn’t Exist’ September 26, 2014 - 4:13 PM By Zoey DiMauro Subscribe to Zoey DiMauro RSS Share on Facebook Share on Twitter More Sharing Services 28 Share on print Share on email
Rep. Raul Grijalva arrested
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) was one of 200 people, including eight Democratic members of Congress, arrested for blocking a main street near the U.S. Capitol during a pro-immigrant rally on Oct. 8, 2013. (AP photo) (CNSNews.com)-- Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) said Wednesday that any distinction between illegal immigrants and those who obey U.S. laws and enter the country legally “doesn't exist.”
CNSNews asked the Arizona Democrat, who supports a movement by a growing number of churches to provide sanctuary for illegal aliens facing deportation, what he would say to those who entered the U.S. legally.
"That the issue here is about family," Grijalva replied. "That the issue here is that the people that are seeking the support and the protection of sanctuary are people that are hard-working, families, blended family many times, with citizens and children, and this is not about an issue of some people deserve it, some people don't.
“Quite frankly, the people that have gone through the immigration process and waited all those years are some of the most staunchest supporters, within those congregations, of the individuals that are being provided the protection,” Grijalva said during a press teleconference hosted by Church World Service.
"So it's not an either/or and it's not us versus them," he continued. "It's a human issue. And as somebody else said, these are people that have been part of ... these are kids that go to school with our kids, and these are people that work and pay taxes as we do.
"And so that distinction that you want to make doesn't exist."
"The sanctuary movement is a response to the lack of action," Grijalva continued. "To lead on this moral imperative is critical.
“Sanctuary would spare many families [from] deportation and [give] some the ability to be able to function and live in our society, something all these families have earned,” he added.
Following the example of a similar sanctuary movement in the 1980’s, 24 faith communities - including synagogues and mostly Protestant churches - have offered to harbor illegal aliens in cities such as Denver, Portland, Philadelphia and Chicago.
Sanctuary participants rely on an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) policy that does not allow immigration officers to enter sensitive areas such as schools and churches.
“We’re fairly confident that they won't enter into the sacred space of a house of worship and we’re just hoping they continue to keep that promise,“ said the Rev. Alison Harrington, whose church, Southside Presbyterian Church in Tucson, is part of the movement.
"After the President’s announcement on September 6th to, again, delay administrative relief to those at risk of deportation, faith bodies began to question the morality of waiting and bearing the daily loss of our brothers and sisters any longer,” said Rev. Gradye Parsons of the Presbyterian Church U.S.A. who participated in the Sept. 24 teleconference.
Southside Presbyterian has a legal clinic that places immigrants facing imminent deportation in touch with the church authorities to gain sanctuary. Once the church votes, “we have a prayer service over them and welcome them into the physical space of the church,” said Harrington.
Rosa Robles Loreto, an illegal immigrant who has been living in the U.S. since 1999, has been staying at Southside Presbyterian with her husband and two sons since the order deporting her to Mexico arrived a month and a half ago.
“My goal is to be able to stay together with my sons and my husband who need me and to not separate our family,” Loreto said. "My struggle goes further than from my immediate family, and it is a call and a national petition so that others can also have hope and establish their lives here, where we have already lived for so long."
Theresa Wagner, a representative from the Presbyterian Church, says that the participating churches are willing to break the federal harboring law for the sake of the illegal immigrants.
“There is a risk involved, but we all answer to a higher calling too, so that’s where the denomination stands on that issue,” she said.
“Theres a question as to whether or not they’re even breaking the law,” Wagner further explained. “Some circuits have said that the offence of harboring an individual occurs only when you attempt to conceal them, and the churches that are involved in this movement are by no means attempting to conceal anyone.
“However, there are other courts that have ruled that the mere provision of shelter is enough to have violated the harboring law,” she acknowledged.
Rabbi Linda Holtzman of the New Sanctuary Movement of Philadelphia defended her congregation's civil disobedience. "When we see an unjust law it needs to be disobeyed, and in the Jewish community, I think that's clearly clear,” she said.
Just as it is when a church forfeits its tax-exempt status if they become part of political campaigns, they should also lose their sanctuary status if they harbor economic refugees, parasites and criminals who are in this country illegally.
There is also no difference between charity and theft. /s
“the issue here is about family,” Grijalva replied.”
Sounds like this Stalinist look-alike from a Grade C 1950’s Western is channeling Jeb Bush.
... OH and don’t forget there is no difference between consensual sex and rape. (How many absurd moral equivalencies can we come up with here?)
They have taught millions of people to disobey and disrespect our laws. They teach them to demand handouts paid by taxpayers. They teach them to disrespect America and the American flag.
They hate America and want to turn it into a backward third world country.
Rep. Raul Gringolas, (F-Michoacan) said Wednesday that any distinction between illegal immigrants into Mexico and those who obey Mexican laws and enter Mexico legally “doesn’t exist
there fixed it
“... supports a movement by a growing number of churches to provide sanctuary for illegal aliens ...”
Hippie Jesus strikes again.
These are commie churches—CINO (Christian in Name Only).
Nothing like aiding and abetting lawbreakers that rape, murder, and bring in all kinds of diseases into America in the Name of Christ eh?
Does Mexico distinguish between legal and illegal immigration?
Let's adopt AND ENFORCE Mexico's immigration laws.
What could be fairer than that?
Pro-amnesty American citizens must think that the rest of us 300,000,000 Americans are blind and stupid.
For instance, Pro-amnesty people demand that President Obama give work visas to at least 8,000,000+ illegals.
But what pro-amnesty traitors conveniently forget to mention is that many of these 8,000,000 illegals who will get work visas have husbands/wives and school-age children.
24,000,000 illegals get amnesty? My point is this: Pro-amnesty people are not really talking about 8,000,000 illegals, because they secretly know in their hearts that they are really talking about more like 24,000,000 illegals----3 times 8,000,000 illegals--- who will eventually get AMNESTY when President Obama takes his pen and quickly signs his executive order in a few weeks.
how did I arrive at the number of 24,000,000 illegals? I did it this way: I multiplied 8,000,000 illegals by 3.
1. Obviously, illegal immigrant men need their wives and children to keep them company. and many of them are already here.
2. And illegal immigrant women need their husbands to help them with the children.
3. Also, these illegal immigrants with their new work visas will now have no fear that immigration agents will be coming to their home to check to see how many in the household besides the visa holder are here legally.
4. So once they get their work visas, they can invite any number of relatives to live with them without fear that immigration officials will be coming to their unexpectedly to check the status of the people in the home. As long as visa holders pay their rent on time and their children attend school, we can be sure that no immigration officials will bother them and their families.
My point is this: Work visa holders and their growing families will be here forever. Basically, deportation of these illegals and their families will never happen, if President Obama has his way and goes ahead and signs his executive order soon after the midterm election.
5. You see, you can't very well legalize 8,000,000 illegals by giving them work visas, on the one hand, and then, on the other hand, turn around and deport husbands and wives and children of the work visa holders, persons who may not qualify for work visas for one reason or the other.
6. So I believe that multiplying 8,000,000 illegals by 3 is a good conservative estimate of how many illegals will immediately benefit from President Obama's executive order---an estimate based on a household with two parents, one child.
7.Of course, many households will be single households with no children.
8.But, as we know, many, many households of illegals who will be given work visas will have two or more children, so all those many children will easily make up for those households in my 24,000,000 estimate that have no children.
9. So that is the way I concluded that 24,000,000+ illegals will really get amnesty when traitor President Obama gives away our country with the simple signing of his executive order: 8,000,000 million illegal work visa holders times a conservative estimate of 3 member's in each illegal immigrant household.
10. Again, when President Obama quickly signs his executive order soon after the mid-term elections, he will NOT be giving amnesty to just 8,000,000 illegals as the pro-amnesty people want us to believe.
11. Rather, when the smoke clears, anti-amnesty people will wake up one morning and suddenly realize that the pro-amnesty people and President Obama have pulled off one of the biggest scams in history, because President Obama will really give amnesty to 24,000,000 illegals, not 8,000,000 illegals as President Obama will claim when he signs his executive order soon after the mid-term elections.
NOTE: 'Because it was the right thing to do." This is Obama's favorite phrase when he wants to justify his decision on a controversial subject like illegal immigration.
It is as if Obama wants us to believe that his decision is divinely inspired, that is, God himself told him what to do. What a bunch of crap.
So be prepared to hear Obama's phrase---"Because it was the right thing to do"---over and over after Obama signs the worst executive order ever.
It is the worst ever because President Obama will lie to us and give amnesty to not 8,000,000 illegals as Obama will lead us to believe when he signs the executive order, but to an unbelievable number of 24,000,000 illegals. Sick. Sick. Sick.
NOTE: If the government can't handle those hundreds of illegals who crossed the Mexican border recently, how in the world is the government going to process the 8,000.000 illegals that President Obama will give amnesty to in a few weeks after the mid-term elections? No way. No way.
So a convicted crook can stand in front of a judge in this country and say: “Since there is NO difference between ‘legal’ and ‘illegal’, THAT means I won’t be sentenced!!”
I am going to use that defense when I start performing undocumented bank withdrawals. Will that work???
Let’s remember that the Democrats love illegal immigration because they are fraudulent votes that can be bought with taxpayer-funded benes — which is why they oppose VoterID.
It is also no accident that they have been encouraging the wholesale abortion of Americans, so they can be replaced with people who come from places where questioning authority can be hazardous to one’s health.
Ignorant, impoverished and unaccustomed to freedom? Ideal citizens for the Party of Jim Crow.
There is an easy fix for this. Why don't you take them with you? The whole family could then enjoy the freedom from living in their "home country" and avoid having to hide from the law.
One point I’d like to add. Both the husband and wife need to be here in order to create an anchor baby, who, when it is born in a U.S. emergency room, seals the deal for the entire family. Have you ever spoken to an anchor “baby”? Fifteen years after the fact they are arrogant as can be with the largest sense of entitlement you have ever seen.
Tell that to the legal immigrants who are paying thousands of dollars in legal fees for the privilege of having bureaucrats jerk their lives around for five or six years.
That’s what you call a perverse disincentive.
I will send your post to the conservative radio hosts in the the Tucson area. I do not think this latest outrageous statement by the racist and invader representative has been aired and explored.
If you do a search for “Grijalva” here on FR, you will find him to be a repeat offender. Total @sshole.
Rep. Raoul Grijalva (D-AZ) represents Southern Arizona from Tucson to Yuma. That area contains one of the most heavily used smuggling corridors (drugs and people) along the US/Mexico border. His heart lies somewhere south of there...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.