Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Called by God to Help

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Called by God to Help

    EW YORK TIMES (Op-Ed): Called by God to Help
    By ROGER MAHONY

    March 22, 2006
    Op-Ed Contributor
    Los Angeles

    I'VE received a lot of criticism for stating last month that I would instruct the priests of my archdiocese to
    disobey a proposed law that would subject them, as well as other church and humanitarian workers, to criminal penalties. The proposed Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control bill, which was approved by the House of Representatives in December and is expected to be taken up by the Senate next week, would among other things subject to five years in prison anyone who "assists" an undocumented immigrant "to remain in the United States."

    Some supporters of the bill have even accused the church of encouraging illegal immigration and meddling in politics. But I stand by my statement. Part of the mission of the Roman Catholic Church is to help people in need. It is our Gospel mandate, in which Christ instructs us to clothe the naked, feed the poor and welcome the stranger. Indeed, the Catholic Church, through Catholic Charities agencies around the country, is one of the largest nonprofit providers of social services in the nation, serving both citizens and immigrants.

    Providing humanitarian assistance to those in need should not be made a crime, as the House bill decrees.
    As written, the proposed law is so broad that it would criminalize even minor acts of mercy like offering a
    meal or administering first aid. Current law does not require social service agencies to obtain evidence of legal status before rendering aid, nor should it. Denying aid to a fellow human being violates a law with a higher authority than Congress "” the law of God.

    That does not mean that the Catholic Church encourages or supports illegal immigration. Every day in our
    parishes, social service programs, hospitals and schools, we witness the baleful consequences of illegal
    immigration. Families are separated, workers are exploited and migrants are left by smugglers to die in the
    desert. Illegal immigration serves neither the migrant nor the common good.

    What the church supports is an overhaul of the immigration system so that legal status and legal channels
    for migration replace illegal status and illegal immigration. Creating legal structures for migration protects
    not only those who migrate but also our nation, by giving the government the ability to better identify who
    is in the country as well as to control who enters it.

    Only comprehensive reform of the immigration system, embodied in the principles of another proposal in
    Congress, the Secure America and Orderly Immigration bill, will help solve our current immigration crisis.
    Enforcement-only proposals like the Border Protection act take the country in the opposite direction.
    Increasing penalties, building more detention centers and erecting walls along our border with Mexico, as
    the act provides, will not solve the problem.

    The legislation will not deter migrants who are desperate to survive and support their families from
    seeking jobs in the United States. It will only drive them further into the shadows, encourage the creation

    of more elaborate smuggling networks and cause hardship and suffering. I hope that the Senate will not
    take the same enforcement-only road as the House. The unspoken truth of the immigration debate is that at the same time our nation benefits economically from the presence of undocumented workers, we turn a blind eye when they are exploited by employers. They work in industries that are vital to our economy yet they have little legal protection and no opportunity to contribute fully to our nation.

    While we gladly accept their taxes and sweat, we do not acknowledge or uphold their basic labor rights. At
    the same time, we scapegoat them for our social ills and label them as security threats and criminals to
    justify the passage of anti-immigrant bills. This situation affects the dignity of millions of our fellow human beings and makes immigration, ultimately, a moral and ethical issue. That is why the church is compelled to take a stand against harmful legislation and to work toward positive change.

    It is my hope that our elected officials will understand this and enact immigration reform that respects our
    common humanity and reflects the values "” fairness, compassion and opportunity "” upon which our
    nation, a nation of immigrants, was built.

    Roger Mahony is the cardinal archbishop of Los Angeles.

  • #2
    EW YORK TIMES (Op-Ed): Called by God to Help
    By ROGER MAHONY

    March 22, 2006
    Op-Ed Contributor
    Los Angeles

    I'VE received a lot of criticism for stating last month that I would instruct the priests of my archdiocese to
    disobey a proposed law that would subject them, as well as other church and humanitarian workers, to criminal penalties. The proposed Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control bill, which was approved by the House of Representatives in December and is expected to be taken up by the Senate next week, would among other things subject to five years in prison anyone who "assists" an undocumented immigrant "to remain in the United States."

    Some supporters of the bill have even accused the church of encouraging illegal immigration and meddling in politics. But I stand by my statement. Part of the mission of the Roman Catholic Church is to help people in need. It is our Gospel mandate, in which Christ instructs us to clothe the naked, feed the poor and welcome the stranger. Indeed, the Catholic Church, through Catholic Charities agencies around the country, is one of the largest nonprofit providers of social services in the nation, serving both citizens and immigrants.

    Providing humanitarian assistance to those in need should not be made a crime, as the House bill decrees.
    As written, the proposed law is so broad that it would criminalize even minor acts of mercy like offering a
    meal or administering first aid. Current law does not require social service agencies to obtain evidence of legal status before rendering aid, nor should it. Denying aid to a fellow human being violates a law with a higher authority than Congress "” the law of God.

    That does not mean that the Catholic Church encourages or supports illegal immigration. Every day in our
    parishes, social service programs, hospitals and schools, we witness the baleful consequences of illegal
    immigration. Families are separated, workers are exploited and migrants are left by smugglers to die in the
    desert. Illegal immigration serves neither the migrant nor the common good.

    What the church supports is an overhaul of the immigration system so that legal status and legal channels
    for migration replace illegal status and illegal immigration. Creating legal structures for migration protects
    not only those who migrate but also our nation, by giving the government the ability to better identify who
    is in the country as well as to control who enters it.

    Only comprehensive reform of the immigration system, embodied in the principles of another proposal in
    Congress, the Secure America and Orderly Immigration bill, will help solve our current immigration crisis.
    Enforcement-only proposals like the Border Protection act take the country in the opposite direction.
    Increasing penalties, building more detention centers and erecting walls along our border with Mexico, as
    the act provides, will not solve the problem.

    The legislation will not deter migrants who are desperate to survive and support their families from
    seeking jobs in the United States. It will only drive them further into the shadows, encourage the creation

    of more elaborate smuggling networks and cause hardship and suffering. I hope that the Senate will not
    take the same enforcement-only road as the House. The unspoken truth of the immigration debate is that at the same time our nation benefits economically from the presence of undocumented workers, we turn a blind eye when they are exploited by employers. They work in industries that are vital to our economy yet they have little legal protection and no opportunity to contribute fully to our nation.

    While we gladly accept their taxes and sweat, we do not acknowledge or uphold their basic labor rights. At
    the same time, we scapegoat them for our social ills and label them as security threats and criminals to
    justify the passage of anti-immigrant bills. This situation affects the dignity of millions of our fellow human beings and makes immigration, ultimately, a moral and ethical issue. That is why the church is compelled to take a stand against harmful legislation and to work toward positive change.

    It is my hope that our elected officials will understand this and enact immigration reform that respects our
    common humanity and reflects the values "” fairness, compassion and opportunity "” upon which our
    nation, a nation of immigrants, was built.

    Roger Mahony is the cardinal archbishop of Los Angeles.

    Comment


    • #3
      wow-I applaud mahoney for taking this huge stance against the anti-immigrants bashers...Let it be known that jesus would have never accepted such an evil law...Every churches in my community are leting everyone know what those anti-immigrants bashers wants to do and they are doing a great job by making people understand that this will not only change the life of undocumented immigrants, but normal U.S citizen like you and i, that are good moral people and if those racist are allow to win this fight, normal US ciizens will be jailed for 5 years, just for helping someone in need..

      The bible clearly states to help the poor whyle aliba and his racist allies are telling us that we need to check their papers first, then help later, if there are here illegally, then we shall let them die..NON SENSE, YOU EVIL DOERS..YOU WILL NOT WIN THIS WAR.

      Comment


      • #4
        Let me also let you know that we know who wrote the book "ANTICHRIST" and we have read it.

        __________________________________________________________________________________________


        "The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it.
        What is more harmful than any vice?--Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak--Christianity..."


        http://www.fns.org.uk/ac.htm


        THE ANTICHRIST

        by Friedrich Nietzsche
        Published 1895

        translation by H.L. Mencken
        Published 1920

        Comment


        • #5
          As written, the proposed law is so broad that it would criminalize even minor acts of mercy like offering a meal or administering first aid. Current law does not require social service agencies to obtain evidence of legal status before rendering aid, nor should it. Denying aid to a fellow human being violates a law with a higher authority than Congress "” the law of God.
          --------------
          How can a moral person read this statement above, then turn around and vote for enforcement-only bill that would also attack normal U.S citizens??..

          Should i inore a man that is hungry and thisty?? should i let a man die right in front of my face..Should i ignore a man's cry for some food??

          I would rather go to jail then let a man die, i dont want blood in my hands..i dont want god to ask me about the man i left for dead, when ill be judge.

          Comment


          • #6
            The Catholic Church has been a major presence in Mexico for how many centuries? Just how has it improved the conditions of the people in Mexico? Does the Church use its power and wealth to get the elites of Mexico to provide decent jobs, health care, and educations for Mexicans? It is hypocritical for the Church to expect Americans to be charitable with taxpayer dollars, while the Church has fought to enrich and protect itself, most notably from the $millions in payouts to families of children sexually abused by priests. It is also hypocritical in that Church policies on issues such as family planning have helped to keep Third World countries overpopulated and poor.

            Comment


            • #7
              Here is the argument of the author of "ANTICHRIST", he who strikingly echoes sentiments of anti-immigrants :


              7.
              "Christianity is called the religion of pity.-- Pity stands in opposition to all the tonic passions that augment the energy of the feeling of aliveness: it is a depressant. A man loses power when he pities. Through pity that drain upon strength which suffering works is multiplied a thousandfold. Suffering is made contagious by pity; under certain circumstances it may lead to a total sacrifice of life and living energy--a loss out of all proportion to the magnitude of the cause (--the case of the death of the Nazarene). This is the first view of it; there is, however, a still more important one. If one measures the effects of pity by the gravity of the reactions it sets up, its character as a menace to life appears in a much clearer light. Pity thwarts the whole law of evolution, which is the law of natural selection. It preserves whatever is ripe for destruction; it fights on the side of those disinherited and condemned by life; by maintaining life in so many of the botched of all kinds, it gives life itself a gloomy and dubious aspect".

              Friedrich Nietzsche.
              THE ANTICHRIST

              --------------------

              FULL TEXT:

              http://www.fns.org.uk/ac.htm

              Comment


              • #8
                More to the point--people who are dependent on charity often turn against the giver, out of resentment that they need aid. Do you really think these "immigrants" appreciate that the education, medical care, and such that they receive comes from someone else's sacrifice? From what I've seen, and from a recent Pew study, "immigrants" consider what they get a matter of entitlement--that they're somehow owed because the U.S. has "exploited" them or their countrymen somehow. Nor does "Christian charity" require that the giver beggar himself to provide it, which is what importing millions upon millions of poorly educated unskilled workers would do to the U.S. Hillel, a Jewish philosopher, believed in enlightened self-interest: "If I am not for myself, who will be; if I am only for myself, what am I." The kindest and most legal thing the Church could do would be to feed and provide emergency medical care for illegal aliens, then put them on a bus or plane home.

                Comment


                • #9
                  So, according to YOUR logic YOU Aliba are against everything that has given you all that you have?

                  Are you then against your mother and father, because they gave you the life and nurtured and raised and supported you when you couldn't walk, talk or support yourself in any way (as an infant and as a child)?
                  And also were your parents and grandparents against everyone here, because they were given a chance to stay and live here?

                  What a balooney, Aliba!
                  How stupid do you think your readers are?!

                  P.S. Or may be more to the point is that you - Neitzsche follower - just project the mean spirit of yours onto ordinary people around you?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    My ancestors did not get "charity", at least not from the government. They came here honestly and worked for what they got. No welfare state back then, unlike today. Those who couldn't support themselves (or who didn't have family and friends to do so), went home. My parents and grandparents also only had families of a size that they themselves could afford to support. Perhaps if the illegal aliens we see today, and their countrymen, had acted so responsibly they'd be better off. As it is, they seem to have no qualms about having U.S. taxpayers pick up the tab for children they really can't afford otherwise.

                    And that "baloney" is part of the reason the U.S. is so loathed around the world. Not an idea original to me, but one that occurs in development policy. No one likes to be the object of charity. Would you?

                    What the Bishop is calling for is "Christian charity" as the basis for immigration policy, NOT the rule of law. Furthermore, from the Pew Study on reasons Mexicans illegally immigrate, most are not doing it out of "desperation" (they had jobs in Mexico) but because they wanted MORE. And Mexico's not even among the poorest countries in the world--it's just poorer than the U.S. and close. Aside from the issue of separation of Church and State, there's also the little matter of WHOSE religious values we should be following. Some Christian denominations require tithing, the donation of 10 percent of one's income, to the Church. Shall we do that to pay for these acts of "charity"? As long as we're letting religious precept determine what our government does? It's bad enough the present admin is giving tax dollars to "faith-based initiatives". Then, there are other religions, and agnostics and atheists. Should THEY have to pay for "Christian charity"? And just what standing would they have in immigration if religious belief underlies our immigration policy?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      "My ancestors did not get "charity". They came here honestly and worked for what they got. No welfare state back then, unlike today".


                      Back in the days when your grandparents came here they just had to board a ship and arrive here. There was nothing like "Immigrant Visa" or "Adjustment of Status" , one simply arrived and was deemed American by virtue of applying for Citizenship (prior to 1920's).

                      As to "welfare state", it was the "New Deal" under Roosvelt that made this country a welfare-state: to pull it out of depression that it succumbed to in the late 20's.

                      Again it was YOUR ancestors who got all the advantages of charity and welfare (reminding you: taxes on high-income earners were staggering since the depression era and rose to 91% in early 60's! ),
                      and made it to middle class or else you would be no different than Mexicans today.

                      But TODAY's Immigrants DON'T need no charity or welfare: with economy booming they can work and take care of themselves without any kind of "welfare charity".
                      Besides, the WELFARE LAWS HAVE CHANGED IN 1996!
                      How long are you going to spew lies about "so many people living off welfare", when IN FACT those welfare laws have been changed, revised and many welfare programs have simply been canceled since 1996!

                      What Church stands against is being incriminated and punished for giving IT'S OWN resourses (food, clothing and etc.) to those who come to it's door in need of shelter, food and other basic nessessities.
                      What Church stands against is an order to turn the starving away if the latter can't produce the ID.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        My grandparents came circa 1900 before income taxes, before social security, and before the goodies that you get today. My grandparents and my father's cousin risked being turned back at points of entry for communicable diseases. If you've ever been to Ellis Island, you'd know it was not an easy process to get into this country, or to stay here. My grandfather worked as a peddler, a factory worker and a janitor. HE never made it to the Middle Class. What did that was the availability of good paying factory jobs that my dad was able to do--jobs which are going away partly because of illegal immigration.

                        Yes, today's immigrants can work, but they often don't earn enough to get out of the working poor, which is why immigrants and Latinos have higher rates of welfare usage than other groups. Remember, many immigrants never become naturalized, and ARE eligible for welfare once they've been here more than 5 years. They are also able to collect welfare (e.g. WIC) on behalf of U.S. born children EVEN IF THEY'RE HERE ILLEGALLY THEMSELVES. They are also heavier users of social services, such as education because they tend to have more kids than others--and pay less in taxes, often being eligible for the EIC. Those, buddy boy, are subsidies, or "charity". Ditto, health care. There's a recent case where legal immigrants are suing the state of Maryland for dropping them from Medicare (or is it Medicaid, I can never remember) coverage for chronic diseases if they've been here less than 5 years. (The federal law says five years, BUT States can offer THEIR part of it to even recent immigrants at their discretion.) If immigrants can support themselves, then why are they seeking charity? As for working--check today's NY Times Business section for the piece on who will do the farm work. It's very evident from the article that the only reason employers want illegal aliens is that they're cheap, and that guest workers are only feasible IF they're cheap enough as well, meaning low wages and no benefits. Having to meet minimum wage laws and other provisions is why these farmers don't use the existing H2-A program as often as they should. I'll give you three guesses who employers expect to pick up the tab.

                        IF employers really need these workers so badly, then let them assume the full costs of importing them--provide wages above poverty level, medical insurance, and pensions.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Lies as usual.

                          But what else would you expect from this "Nietzsche-Darwin Ideology" peddler?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            ALIBA, is clearly,a FAIR advocate..You can tell by all he lies that he writes, he's a despecable racist human beings.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Since you remind of FAIR, here is the link you saw before:

                              http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intel...cle.jsp?aid=93

                              Regards,
                              IE

                              Comment



                              Working...
                              X