Bishop Gomez On Supreme Court Review Of Arizona Imm. Law

[dominicansoul]

i wish the immigration laws weren't so tough... so many people would love to have the opportunities that exist in america, but cannot because they are too poor to pay to become u.s. citizens...so, in their desperation, they come illegally, the only way they can... i think the bishops are to be commended for standing up for the dignity of these people... they are human after all, not stray cattle...

(...also, i wish the u.s.a. would be more lenient to Canadians...canadians can't even enter the green card lottery!!!)

...and to be honest, i will never ever travel to arizona, because i am hispanic, and I sure as heck don't want to be sent south of the border on a dilapidated bus just because i forgot to carry my driver's license with me on my walk in the park......

[MissScripture]

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1335918743' post='2425859']
i wish the immigration laws weren't so tough... so many people would love to have the opportunities that exist in america, but cannot because they are too poor to pay to become u.s. citizens...so, in their desperation, they come illegally, the only way they can... i think the bishops are to be commended for standing up for the dignity of these people... they are human after all, not stray cattle...

(...also, i wish the u.s.a. would be more lenient to Canadians...canadians can't even enter the green card lottery!!!)

...and to be honest, i will never ever travel to arizona, because i am hispanic, and I sure as heck don't want to be sent south of the border on a dilapidated bus just because i forgot to carry my driver's license with me on my walk in the park......
[/quote]
And you can't even speak Spanish! You would be so lost!

[dominicansoul]

it would be a nitemare!! yup, im staying farrrrrrrr from arizona....

[Anomaly]

dominican, you wouldn't be deported just because you are Hispanic. Nor is it likely you would even be in a situation that you would have to prove you citizenship. Stating otherwise is fear mongering.

The Bishop is pandering to fear, possibly for political correctness, maybe for publicity for his brand ofCatholicism. I don't know his motivation to write the pathetic piece.

I wrote on PM years ago questioning why US Bishops did more to block the US from enforcing immigration laws while doing Nothing to promote revision of US immigration policy. I cam only speculate why educated and intelligent people in leadership positions pander to people's fears and direct their efforts towards symptoms in lieu of the addressing the cause.

Edited May 2, 2012 by Anomaly

[Socrates]

Arizona currently has a huge Hispanic population (actually a majority of the younger population, I've read). So it's extremely dubious DS or anyone else would attract any attention merely for being of Hispanic ethnicity. Besides, it is illegal to question anyone on their immigration status (much less deport them) without them engaging in certain clearly-defined types of behavior to arouse "reasonable suspicion." And over 70% of Arizonans support this law. Living in Texas (which also has a huge Mexican population), we know people of Mexican descent who believe more should be done to keep illegals and the criminal element out of the country.

Most of the opposition here seems to be more irrational fear-mongering than based on facts and reality.

[dominicansoul]

...well, Texas has done stuff they won't admit... like the time they deported a minor wihtout even contacting her family...she went to mexico and lived there for months... she claimed she was an illegal just to get out of her family's hair...they took her word for it, and she was gone...


...so, the government isn't really to be trusted... at least that is the message i get from most of you conservatives... until we are talking about immigration or the death penalty, than suddenly, the government knows exactly what they are doing and they are proficient at it...

Bishop Gomez is definitely NOT a liberal, he's just being Catholic... looking out for the less fortunate... sorry if that seems too liberal for some people...

as far as a guarantee I won't be deported, or treated like a criminal in Arizona, well... i won't take you guys word for it... i'm steering clear from that place...

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1335926325' post='2425904']

...so, the government isn't really to be trusted... at least that is the message i get from most of you conservatives... until we are talking about immigration or the death penalty, than suddenly, the government knows exactly what they are doing and they are proficient at it...

[/quote]

yeah what's with that?

[havok579257]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1335925422' post='2425898']
Arizona currently has a huge Hispanic population (actually a majority of the younger population, I've read). So it's extremely dubious DS or anyone else would attract any attention merely for being of Hispanic ethnicity. Besides, it is illegal to question anyone on their immigration status (much less deport them) without them engaging in certain clearly-defined types of behavior to arouse "reasonable suspicion." And over 70% of Arizonans support this law. Living in Texas (which also has a huge Mexican population), we know people of Mexican descent who believe more should be done to keep illegals and the criminal element out of the country.

Most of the opposition here seems to be more irrational fear-mongering than based on facts and reality.
[/quote]

It comes down to how much trust you put in the government to do the right thing. I think its hypocritical to claim they will do the right thing here put not when it comes to taxes and entitlments.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1335976056' post='2426087']
It comes down to how much trust you put in the government to do the right thing. I think its hypocritical to claim they will do the right thing here put not when it comes to taxes and entitlments.
[/quote]No. You don't have to oly choose extremes. There is a middle ground between Gov running everything and trusted in everything (totalitarianism) and no Gov at all (anarchy).

Some government is acceptable. It's not hypocrasy, it's reasonableness.

[Socrates]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1335976056' post='2426087']
It comes down to how much trust you put in the government to do the right thing. I think its hypocritical to claim they will do the right thing here put not when it comes to taxes and entitlments.
[/quote]
Protecting the borders of a country and regulating who enters the borders, along with other measures of national defense, is among the legitimate duties of the government, and the government has always been one of its functions in this country.

I never claimed the government has [i]no[/i] authority to levy taxes, even though the current level of taxing and spending the government does is obscenely bloated, and needs to cut back drastically. I'm a conservative, not an anarchist. Open borders and simply allowing any one to cross over who wants to is neither virtuous nor conservative, but idiocy.

When we have increasing levels of brutal violence committed by drug cartels and gangs coming over the border (many of the victims being Hispanic), once-prosperous cities having to lay off all their public employees or scandals with officials having $800,000 salaries when the average citizen makes $20,000, due to third-world style gov corruption (as with the 95%+ Mexican Maywood and Bell, CA, respectively), large numbers of persons openly wanting the Southwest to be returned to Mexico, and kids in (American) schools disciplined for sporting an American flag on Cinco de Mayo, we have a serious problem. And, no, its not being too stingy about whom we let across the border.

And, incidentally, socialistic statists [i]love[/i] unchecked immigration and automatic amnesty, because of the proportionately high numbers who end up on welfare, and the overwhelmingly high number of immigrants who vote for liberal Democrats. It's not out of love and concern for immigrants, but their own political self-interest.

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1335982798' post='2426127']
No. You don't have to oly choose extremes. There is a middle ground between Gov running everything and trusted in everything (totalitarianism) and no Gov at all (anarchy).

Some government is acceptable. It's not hypocrasy, it's reasonableness.
[/quote]
Reasonableness is something you'll find in exceedingly short supply on this site.

No one has offered any positive solutions with the real problems caused by unchecked immigration, offering only red-herrings about taxes and the death penalty, and the typical vague sweeping smears of "conservatives."

[havok579257]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1336004076' post='2426269']
Protecting the borders of a country and regulating who enters the borders, along with other measures of national defense, is among the legitimate duties of the government, and the government has always been one of its functions in this country.

I never claimed the government has [i]no[/i] authority to levy taxes, even though the current level of taxing and spending the government does is obscenely bloated, and needs to cut back drastically. I'm a conservative, not an anarchist. Open borders and simply allowing any one to cross over who wants to is neither virtuous nor conservative, but idiocy.

When we have increasing levels of brutal violence committed by drug cartels and gangs coming over the border (many of the victims being Hispanic), once-prosperous cities having to lay off all their public employees or scandals with officials having $800,000 salaries when the average citizen makes $20,000, due to third-world style gov corruption (as with the 95%+ Mexican Maywood and Bell, CA, respectively), large numbers of persons openly wanting the Southwest to be returned to Mexico, and kids in (American) schools disciplined for sporting an American flag on Cinco de Mayo, we have a serious problem. And, no, its not being too stingy about whom we let across the border.

And, incidentally, socialistic statists [i]love[/i] unchecked immigration and automatic amnesty, because of the proportionately high numbers who end up on welfare, and the overwhelmingly high number of immigrants who vote for liberal Democrats. It's not out of love and concern for immigrants, but their own political self-interest.


Reasonableness is something you'll find in exceedingly short supply on this site.

No one has offered any positive solutions with the real problems caused by unchecked immigration, offering only red-herrings about taxes and the death penalty, and the typical vague sweeping smears of "conservatives."
[/quote]

well the thing is the u.s.a immigration law is unjust. they have a high requirement than a current citizen does, not to mention no representation if they feel they were unfairly denied legal immigration. fix the laws, then the problems become fixed.

[Winchester]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1336029011' post='2426449']
well the thing is the u.s.a immigration law is unjust. they have a high requirement than a current citizen does, not to mention no representation if they feel they were unfairly denied legal immigration. fix the laws, then the problems become fixed.
[/quote]
But if we let people freely travel across the border, it would cause chaos. Just like in your neighborhood, where people freely cross other imaginary boundaries. Imagine the violence in a world where just anyone could travel into your city!

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1336044359' post='2426469']
But if we let people freely travel across the border, it would cause chaos. Just like in your neighborhood, where people freely cross other imaginary boundaries. Imagine the violence in a world where just anyone could travel into your city!
[/quote]Great analogy unless you ignore the reality that States and Nations already exist. Neighborhoods generally fiddler out people with ill-intent by being able to live in an ordered society (order maintained by the State or City the neighboorhoods help create). 'Hoods have property rights that are protected. They have building codes and regualtions that disallow somebody pitching a tent next door to your home in a vacant lot in the development and raising pigs, burning their trash outside. Communities of people agree to a set of rules that pools resources (taxes) to pay for fire, police, hospitals, building departments, etc., to support the aggreed to communal order.

If people want to live in an anarchist community, that's fine, as long as they don't infringe upon others who (as a group) choose to have an ordered community. Only MLP could hope to live in an anarchist communtiy because they don't have to deal with reality. MLP don't POOP!!!, so there is no need for standards for sanitation. MLP don't have to buy food so they don't have to have a sophisticated system of food production and distribution. MLP don't have to work, so they don't have to have an economic system for trading your labor, skills, and efforts for an exchange medium that can purchase an iPod, pasteurized milk, or a car manufactured in Korea.

Reality is, almost all people want to live in an ordered community. That's why we establish the institution of a government. Liberals and conservatives will always be in constant conflict about how much control or power we give a government to maintain the order we want.

What is an ordered 'anarchist' society? There is no such thing as an 'anarchist society' if anarchy means no means of agreeing upon what order should be, no means or providing the order, no means of protecting the order, no means of enforcing the order upon the minority who may vehemently oppose the order desired by the majority.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1336047866' post='2426488']

What is an ordered 'anarchist' society? There is no such thing as an 'anarchist society' if anarchy means no means of agreeing upon what order should be, no means or providing the order, no means of protecting the order, no means of enforcing the order upon the minority who may vehemently oppose the order desired by the majority.
[/quote]
Luckily, that is not what's meant by the term amongst those who advocate such things as anarcho-capitalism, market anarchy, voluntaryism, or any of the other various isms in the anarchist family.

[Socrates]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1336029011' post='2426449']
well the thing is the u.s.a immigration law is unjust.[/quote]
Your assertion . . .

[quote]they have a high requirement than a current citizen does[/quote]
Requirements for citizenship were much higher when my great-grandparents came to Ellis Island over 100 years ago. Yet, then, we did not have the problems caused by unchecked immigration we have today.

[quote], not to mention no representation if they feel they were unfairly denied legal immigration.[/quote]
If they are not American citizens, they do not need to be represented by U.S. government.

[quote] fix the laws, then the problems become fixed.[/quote]
You haven't said anything about how the laws should be "fixed."

Sovereign states have a right to limit and regulate who crosses over the border into the country, just as we have a right to limit and regulate whom we let into our homes. Simply letting in everybody and anybody who showed up at my home would not be just to my wife and daughter.