Arizona's bishops -- including Bishops Kicanas, Wall and Phoenix Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted -- opposed the bill as it came through the Legislature. On April 26, Bishop Kicanas on his diocesan website called for the USCCB general counsel to review the legislation with an eye toward having the conference join friend-of-the-court briefs in support of overturning it.At America, the National Catholic Weekly:
Along with Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted of Phoenix and Bishop James S. Wall of Gallup, N.M., whose diocese includes parts of northern Arizona, Bishop Kicanas had called for a veto of the bill and for a more comprehensive approach at the federal level to solve immigration problems“Illegal immigration is wrong and dangerous for everyone involved,” he asserted. There is nothing good about people risking their lives to enter the U.S., and there is nothing good about Americans not knowing who crosses their borders, “especially in an age of terrorism, drugs and organized violent crime”....Although flawed, Archbishop Chaput continued, the Arizona law unintentionally accomplishes the good of bringing immigration reform and its human issues to the forefront of the national discussion....“Our current immigration system is now obviously broken. Congress needs to act.”
“...but that cannot come at the cost of immigrants’ basic human rights.”
Archbishop should acknowledge that the new AZ law DOES NOT threaten “basic human rightst”!
We don’t need “reform.” What we need is to enforce the laws already on the books. Since the federal government won’t enforce the laws, Arizona had to.
It’s very simple. These folks are here illegally. When you do something against the law, you get punished. Why is that so difficult to understand?
the bishop REALLY needs THIS old priest’s book! :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMaNa1K8lJo&playnext_from=TL&videos=azkZd0nKgBY
This guy’s the King of Wafflers. “Bad for people to risk lives crossing border”, “Bad for Americans who don”t know who’s crossing border”...duh!
“Congress needs to act”
...been there, done that. They had years of opportunity! AZ was committing suicide NOT doing what they did!
Denver Quisling Ping
The reasons behind these views needs to be discussed thoroughly.
Hi Lorica!
There is nothing more useless and counter productive than someone that makes vague complaints about people trying to productively address a real but difficult problem, but is unwilling to put forth any alternative.
The Arizona law does not place any additional requirements on Immigrants than they already face under Federal law. Apparently the "human right" that the Bishop is trying to protect is the right to ignore international borders, and have immigrants ignore any immigration laws that might prevent them from living in the United States.
I am a strong proponent of legal immigration. I believe we should increase quotas for legal immigration AFTER we become more effective at enforcing our immigration laws.
I believe in leniency for otherwise law abiding illegal immigrants in the form of a limited time offer of not prohibiting them from applying to immigrate legally after they have been sent home.
But first we need to start upholding our laws.
Yes, that will cause hardship for people who have broken our laws. While I do believe in trying to be compassionate as reasonably possible, the responsibility for breaking those laws and the consequences fall upon those that broke them. The last amnesty made matters worse. We can't just keep letting people break the law and then granting amnesties for them which reward those that break the law.
That is not right. It's not fair. It's not moral.
The church is supposed to be about repentance and forgiveness. But it is also important that God doesn't forgive the unrepentant.
Send illegal immigrants home, and then give them a fair chance of applying to enter legally. Fair meaning the same opportunity as anyone else with their skills and in a similar situation.
Ping!
They just need to stay in their own country and exercise their human rights there.
Every once in awhile I think about rejoining the Catholic Church and then I read crap like this.
Flawed law unintentionally shows urgent need for immigration reform
Over the past week various people from around the archdiocese have asked for help in reflecting on Arizona’s new immigration law. As readers will know, I’ve used this space many times in the past to urge sensible, national immigration reform. Citizens of this country have a right to their safety and the solvency of their public institutions. But we undermine those very goals if we ignore the basic human rights of immigrant workers and their families.
In the case of Arizona state law, Catholics should listen first to the leaders of the Arizona Catholic community, for obvious reasons. They know the situation there best. Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix, Bishop Gerald Kicanas of Tucson and Bishop James Wall of Gallup, N.M. (whose diocese includes portions of Arizona) are all excellent pastors. Their leadership in the coming weeks and months should set the tone for our own response.
Having said that, it’s worth making a few simple observations:
First, illegal immigration is wrong and dangerous for everyone involved. There’s nothing “good” about people risking their lives for the mere purpose of entering the United States. There’s nothing “good” about our nation not knowing who crosses our borders and why they’re here, especially in an age of terrorism, drugs and organized violent crime. There’s nothing “good” about people living in the shadows; or families being separated; or decent people being deported and having to start their lives all over again, sometimes in a country that they no longer—or never did—know.
Second, the new Arizona law, despite its flaws, does unintentionally accomplish one good thing. Thanks to Arizona, the urgency of immigration reform and the human issues that underlie it—deported breadwinners; divided families; the anxiety of children who grew up here but do not have citizenship—once again have moved to the front burner of our national discussions. Our current immigration system is now obviously broken. Congress needs to act.
Third, no credible immigration reform will occur if the effort becomes an exercise in partisan maneuvering. Both of our major political parties got our country into our current immigration mess. Both parties bear responsibility for fixing it. Neither will solve it alone. Unfortunately, the recent national health-care debate compromised public confidence in some of our key federal lawmakers. Having pushed through a deeply flawed national health-care bill in the face of serious concerns and widespread public displeasure, Congress now faces an equally hard task with an equally volatile issue. This will require a transparency, patience, spirit of compromise and bipartisanship rarely seen in Washington in the best of seasons, and too often completely missing in the recent health-care debate.
To put it another way: If the immigration debate divides along the lines of party advantage and slogans, or becomes entangled with very different and unnecessary issues like same-sex relationships—then real people will suffer. And nothing enduring will result.
Finally, we need to remember that America is a nation built by immigrants. For nearly all of us, our ancestors were immigrants; and immigrants—including today’s Latino immigrants—are a blessing for American society in every sector: our economy; our culture; and our religious and moral life. The American Catholic community has a long history of welcoming immigrants and helping them integrate into, and enrich, our nation’s life. Here in Colorado, the Church will continue that work with all of her energy.
Most Rev Charles J. Chaput O.F.M. Cap.
My addendum from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
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.
Well, pay for their upkeep. All these good Christians, interested in putting butts in their pews by giving away my inheritance, wouldn't be so happy with the illegals if they couldn't force taxpayers to pay for.
I am adding this tidbit to the numerous reasons I am not a Catholic anymore.