No, I’m not Bill Maher
The other day I criticized Catholic church leaders for their long-standing, radical, open-borders policies.
Some are now calling me “anti-Catholic” and likening me to left-wing Christian-hater Bill Maher.
Oh, for heaven’s sake.
I was raised Catholic. I benefited immensely from my Catholic high school education. I have deep respect for many Catholic leaders and intellectual leading lights. I continue to be inspired by Catholic pro-life activists.
But yes, I oppose the US Conference of Bishops’ unrelenting push for illegal alien amnesty and the Vatican’s subsidizing of illegal alien shelters for southern border-crossers, and the continued vocal opposition from Catholic officials to overdue immigration enforcement measures.
And no, I’m not a bigot for calling attention to their sovereignty-undermining agenda.
Despite the arguments I’m hearing from some Catholic conservatives that the Pope did not send an open-borders message during his visit this week (see Matthew Balan), pro-amnesty Catholic leaders are not backing down and they interpreted his remarks as an endorsement of their anti-enforcement, sanctuary-promoting activism:
…some members of the Catholic hierarchy said they were shocked that on the same day that Benedict and President Bush affirmed in a joint statement the need for a policy that treats immigrants humanely and protects their families, federal agents were conducting raids at five chicken plants. They arrested more than 300 immigrants accused of being illegal workers.
The timing was coincidental, immigration officials said, and it was not clear whether the pope had known about the arrests when he met with Mr. Bush.
But the raids surprised some American Catholic leaders, who are often on the forefront of advocacy for immigrant rights.
“I was stunned,” said Cardinal Roger Mahony, the archbishop of Los Angeles, the nation’s largest Roman Catholic diocese and one with many Hispanics. “I just feel these raids are totally negative. I thought it was very inappropriate to do it in such a blatant way when the pope was coming, when he has been so outspoken in defending the rights of immigrants.”
The American bishops have been consistently outspoken in favor of legislation to give legal status to illegal immigrants and expand legal avenues for immigrants to bring their family members from abroad.
They and other Catholic activists were among the most visible supporters of a broad bill, supported by Mr. Bush but not enacted by Congress last year, which included a path to legal status for 12 million illegal immigrants.
They took Benedict’s statements last week as affirmation of their work. For while the immigration theme has been overshadowed during Benedict’s trip by his denunciations of the sexual abuse scandal in the church, it was the second issue after the abuse cases that he addressed on the plane from Rome, when he responded to reporters’ questions that were submitted in advance and picked by the Vatican.
The separation of families “is truly dangerous for the social, moral and human fabric” of Latin and Central American families, the pope told reporters aboard his plane. “The fundamental solution is that there should no longer be a need to emigrate, that there are enough jobs in the homeland, a sufficient social fabric,” he said. Short of that, families should be protected, not destroyed, he said. “As much as it can be done it should be done,” the pontiff said…
…The pope also dwelled on the negative impact of family separation. Several bishops took that as a direct reference to the impact of previous immigration raids and deportations, in which illegal immigrant parents were separated from spouses and children who were United States citizens or legal immigrants.
Look. “Keeping illegal immigrant families together” is not the paramount constitutional duty of our government. There is nothing stopping illegal alien deportation fugitives, for example, from keeping their families together and taking them all back home if and when the law finally catches up with them.
Speaking of compassion for families torn apart, I still haven’t heard anything from Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony about Jamiel Shaw’s murder and the permanent separation Shaw’s family suffered at the hands of the illegal alien gang member who murdered their young son, have you?
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Rhymes With Right
- Below The Beltway » Blog Archive » Pope Benedict Speaks Up For Immigrants, Legal And “Illegal”
- Jules Crittenden » MYOHB*
- Catholics Play the “Discrimination” Card
- BILL MAHER AND HIS POPE REMARKS | DequalsS.com
- No, Malkin is not Maher | The Anchoress
- Michelle Malkin does it again « Becoming Hinged
- CitizenCaucus.org» illegal immigration news » No, I’m not Bill Maher
- The Irate Irishman » Get Off Michelle’s A**
- Michelle Malkin » The WSJ’s open-borders obsessive compulsives
- catholicnews.org
- Now that this “memo” has gone « The Old Right Daily
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Immigration
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
Founding Bloggers
» Did The New York Times Just Tell Glenn Reynolds To “STFU”?Doug Ross @ Journal
» 'Hope is fading fast' --- the T-ShirtDoug Ross @ Journal
» BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! Boston Globe Climate Beclownment SpectacularRadio Equalizer
» Media Matters Admits Rush Didn't Make Key Racist RemarksDoug Ross @ Journal
» The CRU Climate Scam In 90 SecondsHot Air
» 3rd quarter GDP 2.8%, not 3.5%
foundingfathers,
I think we have a lot in common.
Behead those who insult Catholics! (just kidding) Really, if the church is lecturing the US on immigration, maybe the Pope can go to Mexico and Central/South America and have a little talk about how they utilize their resources.
In other words, the church should be pushing for an end to corruption in places like Mexico that makes their economy less viable, and keeps their people impoverished, thus impacting stability in the rest of the continent.
As a life long(63years) Catholic…Catholic grade school, HS and college, eucharistic minister, parish council president, and spouse of a 25 year Catholic school educator, I have but one comment:
There used to be a term “Fallen Away Catholic”. Although I no longer attend weekly Mass, I don’t consider myself a fallen away Catholic, the Catholic Church has fallen away from me.
I’m sick and tired of having to say this again and again….
INVADERS,….. GET OUT!!!!!!!
The viewpoint expressed above — and by numerous other apologists for Catholic support of illegal immigration — is utter hogwash.
In fact, not only should the illegals be hauled into court for their lawlessness, but folks offering them support and sanctuary should be in court as well, charged with being accessories after the fact.
Catholics who are so soft-headed and sentimental and double-talking as to rationalize a claim of opposition to illegal immigration and the operation of an enabling support system for the law-breakers once they arrive, are in a hopeless moral and intellectual muddle. I hear the strong voices of many good, Catholic conservatives who don’t go along with this rubbish. But given the behavior of the bishops and the wink from the pope along with direct support from the Vatican, it becomes awfully hard to say that the Catholic Church is not — as an institution — supporting the illegal invasion of the USA. That makes many people very angry and Catholics are going to have to accept that.
DannoJyd,
Nothing seems to be putting an end to the illegal invader madness. Whether it is influence from the churches, business, or politicians nothing is really ending this crap.
If the Bishops and Cardinals are the big problem here in the states, then I would have to believe the Pope knows this fact and he should speak out and instruct his American leaders to stop contributing to the anarchy.
If anyone knows a church/business/politician are being an advocate for lawlessness here in America, then they should have an obligation to speak out and hold those accountable who threaten our nations threatened sovereignty.
Please take the Pope out of the discussion and insert like I have anyone responsible for the continued invasion from our southern border.
geez, why don’t they just go full circle and throw Joy whats her batch’s name in there also.
flippin whiners.
Well said rooster. This is precisely why I cannot support the Republican nominee, Juan McCain.
Could someone please explain to me how “The Church supports illegal immigration because it benefits the Church” is different than “This administration wants the War in Iraq so their big money friends can get rich” are different? Please show me where the Pope’s position violates the Church’s ancient and long standing Social Doctrine?
The Church should just mind their own business. Or is it the Church should mind it’s own business when it’s views differ from yours? Should the Church shut-up on abortion? Euthanasia? Gay Marriage? On the “dictatorship of relativism?”
Please help me understand.
Like I said Mendol, the Vatican is a sovereign country. Does the Holy See allow people to just waltz in and start living there or do they throw them out? You tell me..
Well that “some” are saying things that are not true and what they do not believe. Some folks would call these “some” liars, but I don’t want to be don’t want to appear judgmental. The anti-Church people are those clergy in both the Catholic Church and others who use their office for personal aggrandizement, personal political views and substitute Church Dogma with political dogma. They are a Brood of Vipers to borrow a phrase.
But again I don’t want to be don’t want to appear judgmental. Now it is Sunday morning so carry you gun to Church and drive Senator Barrack Hussein Obama & Bill Maher into another tizzy fit. Just like a two for one sale!
The Catholic Church is not just a religious organization. It is also a financial organization. As such, it has self interests, and because it does, it maneuvers to protect those self-interests.
The Church’s position on Illegal immigration is patently motivated by financial considerations. They are free to do so. We are free to reject it, since neither their religous or financial arguments are compelling.
We are also free to reject the “Catholic-bashing” charge. Pointing out illogical positions is not “bashing.”
Way to NOT address the issues I brought up. In times of great need the Church HAS allowed refugees to stay at the Vatican. around 2000 Jews during WW II. The Pope even opened the Castle Gandolfo (his outside of Vatican residence) to them and allowed his apartment to be used as a maternity ward. You really want to get into a “who does more to help the poor than who” argument with the Church?
planetgeo as are arguments with no facts, just suppositions and unsubstantiated inferences.
Hmmmmm, funny, here I thought the nuns were teaching me to think for myself, to question whatever I didn’t understand/agree with, as long as I wasn’t questioning articles of faith – far as THIS lapsed Catholic is concerned, the gasbags of the American Catholic hierarchy are NOT delivering their pronouncements from a moral or spiritual elevation, but from a matter of money, to fill their pews …………………
Semper Fi’
DM
Ok Mendel, let’s get into comparing how many people have gotten political asylum from the USA, how much money the USA has given to poor countries and the UN, etc. Go ahead if you want to go there.
The Church has been doing it for 2000 years, ya I’m ok with the argument
Mendol,
QUESTION: You raise a good point…..but, have you noticed the dems quit pushing so hard on ending the Iraq war?
ANSWER: My personal observation; it is quite obvious, the dems were cut in on the industrial profits linked to Iraq.
Those pushing the amnesty agenda are not great humanitarians, in most every case there is a money trail leading right to their back pockets.
Rooster,
My observation on liberals is the they lack even the rudimentary ability to use logic. This is something I don’t put up with from Conservatives. Like the Pope holds America to a higher standard, we Conservatives should do the same.
No need to visit Hot Air – I can tell you that the place is overrun with Know Nothings.
I think there is a Murphy’s Law: “Anyone who can claim ‘moral high ground’ – will.”
(Speaking of laws.. I’m still waiting for Cardinal Above the Law to return to Boston and have his day in court to claim his moral high ground.)
In case there is a misunderstanding I meant we should hold each other to a higher standard. We already do that with our Country
Thank you both, zorro and rooster, for your relentlessness on this issue (along with MM). We all get weary at times. Our conservative message is not the joyous sing-a-long tripe of the left. It takes some grittiness to stay in this fight day after grueling day.
And, yes, zorro! I am right there with you on McCain. My fear of the Dems will never be so great that it will make me support a trader from my own team who is a leader in enabling the illegal invasion of our country. And I doubly resent the SOB for counting on my vote based on his belief that he has left me isolated with nowhere else to go.
Maverick candidate…meet maverick voter!
Michelle, no reasonable person could make the comparison. I’m Catholic, and love it! And so many people, priests, and Cardinals are plain wrong on open boarders.
It’s like saying I can perform a marriage. If I tried it, I’d be censured and no one would acknowledge the marriage because I am not ordained.
Same with citizenship. “You cant say I’m here, you have to keep me.” If the Bishops really want to help, they can work to make Mexico a better place to live.
I am also Pro-death penalty and Pro-war on terror because I am Pro-Life!
Thank you, Michelle. I’m a devout Catholic and am in fact working on an M.A. in Theology. You are 100% correct in your criticism of this Pope and the Vatican’s political statements. To come to our country and then to lecture us on open borders and to imply that deportation is “inhumane” is completely beyond what the Vatican is supposed be doing (and doing badly): Saving souls.
Pope Benedict has not mentioned once (as far as I know) anything about abortion, euthanasia, pornography, Hollywood, liberals in Congress promoting the above, Islam, etc.–far more serious issues in the salvation of souls than is illegal immigration.
Yet he laments the loss of the Soviet Union (his talk of more need of “multilateralism”) and incredibly and very stupidly trusts in the U.N. Human Rights agency. He has no clue about Islam as proven by his bowing to Mecca in a mosque.
He thinks there is no oppression in Cuba.
I have taken two classes in Church history and do think that Pope Benedict has provided some of the weakest leadership at least in the past 200 years by a Pope.
The guy (who is to be obeyed in faith and morals as given in the Bible and Tradition–nowhere are socialism and allowing in immigrants uncontrolled in either the Bible or Tradition) has no expertise on government or politics. If he thinks that socialism (which he constantly promotes) is “humane,” the guy needs to get out of the palace more often.
To those Catholics who feel any criticism of the Pope when they overstep their bounds and enter politics (as this one has been doing) is unjustified, just study Church history.
Finally, for those defending this Pope and his comments, you are making a mockery of our Catholic faith. . .because Pope Benedict is with his inane political statements and his lack of concern for his fundamental mission.
Gabe,
Please explain how the Pope’s actual positions on immigration violate the Church’s teaching on Social Doctrine?
RealImmigrantChick is a bigot.
That is the truth.
I doubt it hurt that much.
Another moron: planetgeo.
I have already proved that believing the bishops’ motive for their stance on immigration is “financial” is patently absurd.
I’m not going to repeat myself for the sake of those with closed minds.
I will ask a question: Why have allegedly “conservative” web sites now decided that anti-Catholic bigots can freely spew their garbage?
Well said Gabe. Ironically Italy just elected a government running an anti-immigrant platform.
Congratulations, corona!
You really put the dog in dogmatic.
Gabe – Are we seeing a difference here between this Pope who was obligated to be in the Hitler Youth program, trained in the German Infantry and saw his house taken over by invading American troops at the end of WW2 versus the prior one who grew up on the receiving end of Nazi bombs, knew about the Nazi camps and later endured the humiliation of seeing his country enslaved by the USSR? Sometimes I just wonder…?
I agree with you Mendol. Conservatives, as a rule do not have brains that cannot
get past emotion to operate logically. That is why I so enjoy MM and all of the
people that post on her threads. The church is the church is the church. We must
admit that for centuries the Catholic Church has been raking the money in and not
sending out as much as has been accumulated. Anyone been to any of the parishes
that are just barely squeaking by and begging for money only to be told that if they
can’t get their acts together to raise money they will be closed down? I have. I have seen Priests and Sisters ( don’t most Catholics know that Nuns are cloistered.
and we very seldom see one?) that are at their wits end trying to figure out ways to
collect the money they need to pay for absolutes, no frills. They have to do this
when they should be tending the needy and they resent that. Where is the
Mother Church? Why don’t they sell some of their priceless objects that “litter”
the Vatican? I love the Catholic Church, the Catholic Faith but I can see the
faults. There is no need for the Pope to come to America and tell us that our
house is not in order when he needs to start house cleaning at home.
Oh yes. I just spoke with a renowned Catholic scholar that I have been friends
with since we were teens. He says, Indulgences were real and a lot of the Jews
paid to stay at the Vatican and Castle Gandolfo. As I said, I love the Church but
like I love my husband….I am not blind to faults.
Who cares about the Pope or Bill Maher, honestly….
The hypocrisy is thick … draw a cartoon of muhammed, outrage!
Draw a parallel between the events at the “ranch” in Texas and the decades (centuries?) long abuses in the catholic church… outrage!
Who cares…
According to the Goracle and the entire democrat(S) party the world is ending, America is the culprit and we need more gay lifestyle lessons in elementary school….
perspective please…
The Pope should chastise Mexico for failing to use its resourses to build an economy which supports its citizens. It is not up to us to be the welfare state for all those who cross our borders illegally.
Corona, exactly when and where did you “prove” that believing the bishops’ motive for their stance on immigration is “financial” is patently absurd? And how can we mortals admire such infallibility if you deign not to repeat yourself for those of us who don’t hang out on blogs 24×7?
I happen to be both a conservative and a Catholic, but I don’t have any difficulty criticizing both conservatives and the Catholic Church when their positions are illogical or counter to the best interests of this country. Apparently, you have difficulty doing so.
TXrose
Your issues can be answered, however I don’t want to let the people who claim the Pope is acting out of financial motives off the hook by participating in this thread devolving into what the previous one did. I would suggest you post your concerns at Catholic Answers.
Planet, I also can’t find Corona’s dissertation either but I agree that, if the church’s agenda really was to make more money, they could make FAR more by inciting their faithful among populations suffering under socialist dictators to rise up and demand the same capitalist model that brought USA her wealth and power. Dontchathink?
The Catholic church is the original, and oldest “global” organization. Would not expect them to support any other position on immigration, because they are the original globalists. I certainly don’t agree with it, but do agree with MM’s criticism of it.
Criticizing a “political” position by the church is not the same as Maher’s personal insults!
Thank you Michelle both for taking a stand and taking fire. I don’t give a damn if it’s Billy Graham, GW or the Pope. We have a right to protect our sovereignty AND to define what that is. We are also not the world but we have a right to be here, defend what is ours AND defend ourselves. The hierarchy of the Catholic church is not the only religious leaders promoting and encouraging this debacle and invasion but they are surely front and center.
It’s not anti-Catholic to criticize the political statements of Catholic leaders such as Mahoney. The Pope, though, attempted to thread the needle and avoid domestic politics with his whole message:
“The fundamental solution is that there should no longer be a need to emigrate, that there are enough jobs in the homeland, a sufficient social fabric”
As a supporter of Tancredo’s view on immigration and a Catholic, Tancredo,a former Catholic, should back off the Pope.
The issue of illegal immigration is one on which Catholics of good conscience can disagree. As usual, the devil is in the details. The Church teaches that civil governemnt has an obligation to provide security for its people. At the same time, the Church teaches that we must welcome the stanger, care for the weakest among us. The question is how to reconcile both teachings while loving one another as Jesus loved us. God bless America in its search for the answer.
It is as a federal felony before, during and after the fact. As did the Pope committee a crime by advocating aid to illegals.
Section 274 felonies under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, INA 274A(a)(1)(A):
A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or local government) commits a federal felony when she or he:
* assists an alien s/he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or
* encourages that alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or her to an employer or by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or
* knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.
Radio Relay
The problem (in my case anyway) is not that anyone disagrees with the Pope (though people on this site certainly have attacked me personally for agreeing with him). It is that: 1. His position has been mischaracterized and 2. His motivations impugned. All I am asking is that someone proffer evidence, other than their personal opinions, that he is motivated by greed.
Yes, and, for illegal or legal immigration I keep reviewing those details right here.
bit_boy! You’re right! We should have arrested Pope! Where’s Janet when you really need her? ..
I am a staunch supporter of not seperating families. Go home illegals, and take your anchor babies with you.
Understood, Mendol. When you have a good red herring in your teeth, you don’t want to let it go.
Unfortunately, irrelevant and angry things have been said on these threads (by me, among numerous others). So you use the shrewd debater’s tactic of inflating these bits into your core issue and ignoring the overwhelming case that the Catholic church — as an institution — is supporting the illegal invasion of America.
So, okay. The pope was never a Nazi. And his remarks have been murky enough to give you a toe-hold to raise a storm of protest. And, of course, ~motives~ are almost impossible to prove. Personally, I think those of us who are angry at the Church are correct on almost everything said, except the Nazi part. But I grant you, some of it can not be proven to a legal certainty.
But the behavior of the bishops, the direct support of the Vatican, the various outreach/enabling efforts by the American church, the incessant pro-illegal jawboning by the church hierarchy, all of this adds up to an irrefutable case that the Church is meddling in American politics on the side of illegal immigration.
But you don’t really want to discuss the substance. You want to make the argument about peripheral aspects where you can get a little toe-hold and try to discredit a case that is — in its essentials — unassailable.
For the record, I never said he was a Nazi. He did grow up there and was subjected to a totally different perspective than Pope Paul II. That was my only point – one of perspective based upon one’s expereinces in youth.
If you really think that Pope Benedict is that Liberal, then why aren’t you a Lefebvrite seminarian? Seriously? Promoting socialism? Lamenting the loss of the USSR? The speech on multilateralism wasn’t about the USSR. The Catholic Church’s memory is very long, and throughout the history of Western Europe when any one secular power had too centralized a government and too strong a military relative to the rest of Europe (e.g. Prussia), things happened that the Church would like not to see happen again. And when has the pope been promoting socialism?
Has the Pope advocated one specific political solution? No. He’s just saying that the political solution should be humane, and that it needs to consider that we’re not just dealing with immigration but also with immigrants, who are human beings. Yes, the Pope has no authority over what U.S. Catholics do politically per se, but he does have the authority and the obligation to promote moral thinking on how we treat people, which is illegal immigrants are. If the anti-immigrant folks could just calm down long enough to tone down their rhetoric and remember that they are people, and if the pro-immigrant folks could remember that the U.S. has legitimate concerns, then there’d be a much better chance of something being done.
My lease runs out next week; does this mean I can move to the Vatican? I hear it’s lovely this time of year.
The problem with this is that they are not coming here because of a shortage of jobs. The come here because jobs pay more in this country. And their coming here destroys the social fabric in America and in Mexico.
My position on immigration is fairly straight forward. Secure the border FIRST. Deport as many illegals that here as we can. After those two things are done we can debate how to reform our laws or if we even need too. I am totally comfortable that my stance is in accordance with the Pope’s position. You see I have actually read what he says, not what AP says he said.
The Compassion part comes in when we debate reform and what to do about the anchor babies. With reform, we have a lot of hard working, law abiding, God fearing people to the south of us that want to be American. Should we do anything?
The Anchor Babies. It is easy to say “send em back” but the problem is that they are U.S. Citizens protected by the Constitution. Even if we change the law, they will still be citizens. You think it is OK to deport American citizens because of the crimes of the parents? These are the issues the the Holy Father calls on us to be compassionate.
Harris, I’m here hiding in the Vatican already – I’ll get you in claiming that you’re my wife.
Ok, but I am not very pretty.
First point, scripture can be twisted by anyone to make a point. Which is why your argument that you need “convincing” appears at first hand hypocritical in that you took a segment of the Old Testament to further a cause that we should take in illegal aliens without question.
Now I am all for showing compassion to those in need. I do so, and my church does so. My church is even involved in building one of those shelters on the other side of the border so that the ones who do get caught and sent back don’t die in the desert without any place to sleep and get a few meals.
With that said, whenever someone needs a passage from scripture to show that a group of people are sinning I always point them right back the 10 Commandments because if they can muster through those (and the additions to their standards given by Jesus such as the 7th where Jesus said you have heard it said of old thou shall not commit adultery and I say unto you that if you look upon a woman to lust after her you have committed adultery already with her in your heart.)
So what part of the Ten Commandments says it is okay and non-sinful to:
1. Break a country’s laws by sneaking in across their border in the cover of darkness and paying a smuggler to do so?
2. To steal citizen’s SSN’s and credit card numbers by sifting through their trash for paperwork with that information on it?
3. To blatantly and deliberately do #1 while 9 months pregnant in order to abuse a loophole in the law so that when ICE does catch up with you that you can plead not to separate the child from the parents?
4. To demand social services like food stamps, welfare, hospital care all on the taxpayers dime while not paying anything or very little into the system supporting those services and causing them to go bankrupt and increase taxes on legal citizens.
And that list could go on for a while but I need to head to church. So while I am gone for a few hours can you show me where in the Bible it says that Stealing, Lying and Deceiving are not sinful and then explain to me how these Hispanic Catholics are not violating the Commandments for their own personal gain and with no apparent remorse or repentance and instead demand the be given amnesty?
They are NOT immigrants. They are illegal aliens.
All criminals are human beings. So?
I don’t know of a single anti-immigrant person who reagrds immigrants as anything other than human. The same applies to illegal aliens, who are not the same thing as immigrants.
But bad things don’t become good things just because they are done by “human beings”. I’d expect Catholics, and all Christians, to be exceptionally aware of that. “Up with people” is not a Christian message.
flenser,
And let’s not forget that, if you are a criminal in Mexico, you are MUCH better off commiting your crimes in the USA where the booty is much larger and even getting caught and thrown in a US jail is still a better living standard than roaming free back in Mexico let alone getting caught there and rotting in a Mexican prison.
flenser,
It’s better if you just take out the words immigrants, human beings, and people and insert the word kittens.
Mendol
I don’t think anyone is saying church is motivated by any kind of monetary greed. The church is interested in supporting Catholics, no matter where they come from, or where they are. The church doesn’t care about national boarders.
That is an understandable, yet selfish view on the part of the Catholic church. It goes against those of us who do not want a bunch people in our country who take more than they give back, and who destroy the fabric of the nation.
Silly strawman argument. Nobody is suggesting any such thing.
And who exactly are the people you regard as “suffering” and what are they suffering from? I’d like to see a little more Catholic compassion for the Americans suffering from the ill-effects of the open-borders policy espoused by the Catholic church.
To quote Milton Friedman, you can’t have open borders and a wealthy, compassionate, social welfare state. The immutable laws of economics cannot be ignored. Ask the Soviet Union.
“Open borders benefit Catholic churches looking to fill their pews and collection baskets.”
Straight out of MM’s original post.
You know, if someone leaves a kitten on your doorstep you can’t just leave them out in the cold hungry. You have to take them in and give them a home. Or drop them off at the animal shelter, but they usually euthanize them after a few days, so you have to keep them.
Then you find out that the old lady down the street has a bunch of cats who keep having kittens and she leaves them on your doorstep.
It makes you think, “Man, that’s messed up. What am I supposed to do with all these kittens?”
I’ve sent a private e-mail to Ms. Malkin about this issue…to summarize it here, I don’t have a problem with her original post. What I had a problem with is how the comments got completely out of control, with everybody with some kind of beef about the Church spouting the same sort of thing you’d hear from Bill Maher. Obviously, that’s going to bother some folks, even those who do not agree at all with Church officials on the illegal immigration issue. A few regulars were viciously and personally attacked when all they were doing was sticking up for their faith as a whole. I’ve never seen that level of vitriol aimed at anyone before, not even people like lgm, Rusty, or TheOtherSide. In fact, I don’t think our resident “trolls” have ever been that nasty to anyone. They know who they are and they are still pretty unapologetic. For shame.
Disagree with the Church all you like. I do all of the time on those occasions when they do silly things like promote open borders or go on about global warming. Is it the only church that does things like that? No. At the end of the day, the Pope’s statements are simply his opinion. You’re still going to be hard pressed to find a leader of any sort who is willing to take on radical Islam or stand for traditional values.
greenfairie,
What are you talking about? People say stuff I don’t like all the time, well, mainly because that’s their opinion. Catholicism has been around for a long time, so has Jesus and Christianity. I bet the Pope won’t even read this thread. The bottom line is your religion can take it without crumbling. No one will get shot or beheaded over some comments on a blog. (Not this blog, anyway.)
greenefairie: Don’t get upset at the Pope, it’s his opinion.
Harris: Don’t get upset at posters, it’s their opinion.
Gee, could it be that her top secret ulterior motives have something to do with her oppostion to the open borders policy as espoused by the Catholic church and the Pope? Just a shot in the dark.
I am not Roman Catholic, but I admire the Pope enormously. I do, however, disagree with ‘open borders’ for the US. It is admirable to want to help all who are in need, and frankly what you would expect from a Christian. However, it would not benefit anyone for the US to just open it’s borders to all. It would effectively destroy the very country who has done more than any other in the world to assist the needy and oppressed. …and that would do more harm to the world than good.
Controlled immigration is the only way to protect the US….something that I believe is essential for the future of this world and the rights of all.
No church has the right to deliberately break the laws of the US …. and there are many that do. The Christian faith can do more to help by encouraging the promotion of ‘rights’ for all instead of breaking the laws of this nation. It’s like ‘biting the hand that feeds you”.
Harris said:
A good analogy my friend. Taken further,
.. but you nonetheless continue to take them in until you just can’t afford to care for all of them. Your place turns to squalor with dead cats in the freezer and dung all over the place when the ASPCA finally discovers it. The final blow is that the newspaper fails to point out that you really had such “good intentions”.
And as stated earlier, I think they are allowed by both Republicans and democraps to pour over the borders to fill our polling places more so than the pews. And they don’t have enough money for the collection basket.
That is a mischaracterisation of the thread. There were one or two commenters making Nazi references. It was hardly “everybody with some kind of beef about the Church spouting the same sort of thing you’d hear from Bill Maher”.
Then you go and tell the old lady, “You have got to stop leaving all these kittens on my doorstep. My friends and family like kittens, but it’s really out of control.”
“You’re a racist! Here, take this basket of kittens, you bigot!”
Well, my question is, is His Holiness responsible for the consequences of his Good Words? If the United States’ traditional culture and treasury is eroded under a tidal wave of illegals is it any skin off his nose (like too many of our enemies AND allies)? If he said we should totally unilaterally disarm from B-1s to hunting rifles to show our dedication to peace, is his reasoning humane or suicidal? I’m sorry, but I don’t see too many tent cities in Vatican Square to show their compassion. Nor do I hear him rebuking Islamic terrorists too hard — it’s always the “condition that spawned them” they hide behind. Same act as WWII. I’m not knocking the people, but so few deal with the world as it is than see it as they’d wish it to be. I highly suggest Benedict read “The Shoes Of The Fisherman” to get an idea how lofty moral values can grab the horns of a dirty brutal world.
James Greenidge
Queens NY
Your choice of word here reveals your tone-deafness and the reason that you are so surprised at all the anger that may even sound, at times, like generalized anti-Catholic bigotry.
I refer to your word “silly.”
The Catholic church is one of the most powerful political/religious institutions in the world. When it takes the side of the aggressor in an attack on the economic prosperity, culture, and geographic integrity of the United States, I do not regard “silly” as the appropriate judgment on the Church’s stance.
You blow it off as silly. I am more of a mind with President Bush’s formulation on the war on terror: You are either with us or you are against us. If the Catholic Church is against the defense of America in this struggle, it has my ugly ire. And it is apt to get uglier.
No doubt about it.
This myth that these people are desperately poor really, really, really needs to be put to rest. By world standards they are quite well off. Mexico is not a Third World country. Not economically at least. though politically, it probably is.
Although the good old US of A seems to be heading in that direction pretty quickly.
But can you prove that?
Ignatius Reilly
Thank you for admitting the truth.
Catholics as long as you agree with us we will LET you participate in our movement. But remember, the minute you don’t, you’ll receive my “ugly ire”
Is this what the Republican party has become?
Mendol,
You may have read Ignatius Reilly’s post sideways. I took it to mean that he was viewing the Catholics policies as detrimental to the US. Take a moment and re-read that post and then ask, “Why is he saying this? Where are these feelings coming from.”
Mendol seems STUNNED!!! to discover that conservatism and Catholicism are not the same thing.
Just how old are you, Mendol?
As long as you are discovering how the world works, allow me to let you in on another secret: conservatism and the GOP are not identical either.
G-Dub tells me what to think.
McCain is awesome.
Harris,
Hatred is his motivation in my opinion. I don’t need to back that “opinion” with any fact though. I go by the same standard the Pope “bashers” are going by. I have stated what the Pope’s stated opinion is on immigration above. He disagrees with the “bashers” by about 2 degrees, but hey, why let facts get in the way with my “hatred.”
Re: Mendol @169
Given the ease of cut-and-paste and the conventions of web forums, I take exception to your distorted recasting and expansion of my words to serve your purpose of ridicule.
Ctrl-C / Ctrl-V …check into it.
There is no reason why Catholic conservatives, or conservative Catholics, cannot participate in the conservative movement. The same applies to conservative Jews, conservative atheists, etc.
The problem arises when these people want to claim that their faith IS conservatism. There are plenty of people who are devout Christians who are also moonbat lefties of the worst sort.
Your kitten analogy is excellent and makes the point well, especially considering that unlike kittens, illegal aliens are capable of providing for themselves in their own countries, thus improving conditions there in the process.
I must have missed the post where someone accused you of expressing “hatred”, but I do see where Ignatius Reilly is coming from, just as I understand your argument as well.
Kittens: Catching the mice Americans would have to buy mouse-traps to catch.
Harris,
My point is that I mischaracterized Ignatius’ argument and supported it as my opinion, so by the standards here that should be ok.
I have repeatedly (as others have) that the AP article misrepresented the Pope’s position. AP doing that should come as no surprise to any on this blog.
Do you mean the un-enforced immigration laws? Or the sanctuary cities? Or the Shamnesty Bill sponsored by Juan McCain to grant those who have arrived here illegally are rewarded with citizenship?
Yeah, my girlfriend and I read AP articles and then read the same story as written on foxnews.com or in the Washington Times to see how the wordings are different. I am an English major and she is a political science major so we compare how the different language, albeit slight, changes the story dramatically.
Ah… The old “hatred” canard!!!
Cheapens your argument.
This infighting amongst our beliefs is exactly what the open borders crowd wants. They blast us with this type of division with the willing accomplices of the pro amnesty groups courtesy of ABC, NBC and CBS justifying the need for amnesty.
I do believe there are many trolls posting here with the sole purpose of inciting animosity. However,
those of us that think the church stance has nothing to do with money are just plain naive, or I am truly an idiot and a bigot. A dollar or 2 from a million is still 1 – 2 million dollars.
This madness is not confined to one church, person or business interest.
Michelle has stood her ground with the likes of the detestable Malik Shabaaz; she don’t need my help but, stop acting like she is the problem for illustrating a position that a particular group takes on illegal immigration.
If we don’t start coming together and going after every weak link in the pro-enforcement and legal immigration communities, we will absolutely lose.
May Day is is 11 days away, what are you doing to prepare for the protests?
Dear MM,
There has been a lot of breast-beating about the excesses of the comments in these threads. Many clearly advocate their suppression.
I would like to say that I think they are some of the most excellent threads that I have ever seen anywhere on the Internet. Yes, there have been moments of regrettable rudeness (in which I have participated). But, overall, they have been a highly spirited, but also highly substantive, airing of some very important issues beyond the strict bounds of the usual PC inhibitions.
Given the volatile feelings that are aroused in exploring this issue, I do not think that these threads are anything to be ashamed of. In fact, I think they are an ornament to free and lively conversation on the right.
Thank you.
Radio Relay,
The fact that I used “hatred” as the argument? Or the fact that I can try and sit here and claim to know his motivation without evidence? I would say the second is more damaging.
Look what showed up at my door. There goes the neighborhood.
Harris,
Quit it, we are trying to argue here. Cute cuddly kittens just make we want to call for a group hug.
Great kitty pic, Harris!
(They are such selfish and evil little creatures, but we persist in the belief that they are adorable little angels {grin})
Hey, Mendol….la..la..Will you be my NEIGHbor…?
An obsessive focus on peoples “motivation” is the sign of a liberal. Conservatives worry about the consequences of actions, not what was going on in a persons head while carrying them out.
I feel the ‘ugly ire’ comments came not from hatred but of frustration forged from feeling a foreign force is fostering fears of fracturing families as a financial function.
I know they are cute at first, but you can’t keep them all
What to do? What to do?
What would Bob Barker do?