Posted on 05/06/2010 1:39:59 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand
The chairman of the U.S. bishops Committee on Migration and Archbishop Dolan have joined a growing chorus of opposition to Arizona's harsh new immigration law— while Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles told a Fordham University audience this week that the law could have the unintended effect of reviving the immigration reform movement.
"Thank you, Arizona," said Cardinal Mahony at a May 3 forum at Fordham's Lincoln Center campus in Manhattan titled "Immigration Reform: A Moral Imperative."
"With the stroke of her pen, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer not only signed into law the country's most retrogressive, mean-spirited and useless anti-immigrant legislation, her action has helped to reinvigorate the comprehensive immigration reform movement, and has made clear the consequences of the failure to fix our nation's broken immigration system," said the cardinal, who has been a leading advocate for immigration reform among the U.S. bishops.
In his remarks to a packed auditorium, Cardinal Mahony also directed listeners to a recent blog posting by Archbishop Dolan, saying, "You will discover that he fully shares the Church's commitment to immigration reform."
Archbishop Dolan attributed the Arizona law's passage to a climate of fear during a time of tension and turmoil in society.
"It's a supreme paradox in our American culture—where every person unless a Native American, is a descendant of immigrants—that we seem to harbor an ingrained fear of 'the other,' which, in our history, is usually the foreigner (immigrant), the Jew, the Catholic or the black," he wrote, saying that this is another of history's "periodic spasms of 'anti-immigrant' fever."
He decried the law as having "doubtful constitutionality" and the intent of expelling immigrants. "What history teaches us, of course, is that not only are such narrow-minded moves unfair and usually unconstitutional, but they are counterproductive and harmful," the archbishop wrote.
The ethos of Catholic culture, however, is one of welcome, he wrote, saying that the Church has been a spiritual mother to immigrants—"who were and are mostly Catholic, who have found a home in parishes and schools which helped get them moved in and settled in America."
He said that even from a purely business point of view, "a warm welcome to immigrants is known to be good for the economy and beneficial for a society."
In addition, welcoming immigrants, helping them become legalized and naturalized as citizens, "to help them feel at home, to treat them as neighbors and allies in the greatest project of human rights and ethnic and religious harmony in history—the United States of America—flows from the bright, noble side of our American character," Archbishop Dolan said. "To blame them, stalk them, outlaw them, harass them and consider them outsiders is unbiblical, inhumane and un-American."
The law criminalizes the act of being in Arizona without immigration documentation. Federal law treats that as a civil violation. The Arizona law also requires police officers to arrest those they suspect of being in the country illegally and permits lawsuits against individuals or agencies who people think are not enforcing the law.
"The obvious fear is that untold numbers of people will be challenged to prove their legal status in our country—sending further fear and fright across the immigrant community," Cardinal Mahoney said in his Fordham remarks.
He called on federal officials to "rise above the political divisions and posturing that killed reform legislation in 2006 and 2007" and to "go that extra mile to reach an agreement that can pass Congress and be signed by the president—sooner rather than later."
He said a central feature of reform should be "to bring the 12 million undocumented immigrants out of the shadows and offer them a secure path to legal status. In return, these immigrants must learn English, pay a fine and work for several years before earning the right to receive permanent legal status." He called for a worker visa program to allow more migrant workers to enter the United States legally and improvements to the family-based reunification system.
Also speaking at the well-attended forum sponsored by the Fordham Center on Religion and Culture and America magazine were Thomas Suozzi, former Nassau County Executive, and Clara Rodriguez, professor of sociology at Fordham University.
Bishop John C. Wester of Salt Lake City, chairman of the bishops' Migration Committee, said he would like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to support a legal challenge to the Arizona law, noting that the bishops' first concern is for the well-being of the people who will be affected if the law takes effect. Bishop Gerald F. Kicanas of Tucson, Ariz., also called for the USCCB to become involved in a legal challenge.
A statement issued by the USCCB April 27 from Bishop Wester called the law "draconian," and said although its legal impact is limited to Arizona, its potential effect on how immigrants are perceived and treated extends nationwide.
"With the stroke of her pen, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer not only signed into law the country's most retrogressive, mean-spirited and useless anti-immigrant legislation, her action has helped to reinvigorate the comprehensive immigration reform movement, and has made clear the consequences of the failure to fix our nation's broken immigration system," said the cardinal, who has been a leading advocate for immigration reform among the U.S. bishops.These guys really make me sick.
“Arizona’s harsh new immigration law...”
Thanks for the accurate reporting, Catholics...barf.
A politician and a leftist one at that.
Mahoney is a liberal, pro-gay bishop who did more than his share in covering up the activities of gay priests who were raping alter boys. His opinion is worthless.
“It’s a supreme paradox in our American culture—where every person unless a Native American, is a descendant of immigrants—that we seem to harbor an ingrained fear of ‘the other,’ which, in our history, is usually the foreigner (immigrant), the Jew, the Catholic or the black,” he wrote, saying that this is another of history’s “periodic spasms of ‘anti-immigrant’ fever.”
And you, archbishop, are either incredibly stupid or (much more likely) you’re lying to obscure the point that we don’t want ILLEGAL immigrants. We harbor an “ingrained fear” of seeing our country destroyed, moron.
Where were these concerned Bishops, and Cardinals when their priests were molesting children...
And the rest?
Sorry Bishops, but this Catholic isn’t with you on this one.
As for the rest ... there is no bigger "social services organisation" than the Catholic Church. Ignorance knows no bounds.
It’s not harsh, because it’s simply a restating of Federal law. HOWEVER, it’s badly written, terribly timed, and will probably result in us getting one of the most Muslim-friendly, Third-World encouraging immigration laws ever.
Thanks, Arizona. You should have waited and gone about it some other way. This was setting up a straw man that has now become the banner for every leftist group in this country.
The Church is not a leftist group, but the law was so badly written that it looked as if its only targets were Hispanics, and there is really nothing else the Church can do except come to their aid. Also, I think many Catholics (that I know) were freaked out by the “stop and frisk” implications of the law, which while they really weren’t specifically there, certainly were implied. Bad law, bad judgment.
This should have been done incrementally and by focusing specifically on enforcing some aspect of federal law (for example, preventing illegal immigrants, including Bambi’s Auntie Zeituni, from collecting welfare benefits and forcing them to show ID when they applied, etc.). The thing that upset everyone, including me (and I’m not Hispanic, I’m blonde, American and not likely to be mistaken for an immigrant) was the sort of random stop and ID check implications of this poorly drafted law.
What happened to “Thou shalt not lie”?
Still, why do they always manage to oppose bad things for the wrong reasons?
CNY is certainly apt to spin things left, I admit. But this one came to them already spinning.
I don't know why you assume it's a losing issue. Polls are consistently showing that the Arizona law is *overwhelmingly* popular (60%+). And not just in Arizona, but throughout the country.
The USCCB is nuts. The ones in power are still the aging lefties, but I think we’ll only need about another 5 yrs before they’re all gone, if we can survive until then.
That said, the Pope is known not even to want these national bishops’ councils. I wish he’d get rid of them.
“It’s not harsh, because it’s simply a restating of Federal law. HOWEVER, it’s badly written, terribly timed, and will probably result in us getting one of the most Muslim-friendly, Third-World encouraging immigration laws ever.”
Immigration is not a trading chip.
And it doesn’t go FAR ENOUGH.
I SWEAR they do this to embarrass us Catholics. Jeesh, Faddah, yer excellency, whatevuh! Shaddup, please.
It’s losing because it’s not going to get any political support and it has, in fact, encouraged Obama to announce that immigration (which he said he was not going to try to change this year) is now going to be his immediate priority. This means that any chance we had to control it by electing different people in Nov 2010 is gone.
The problem with the GOP is that it never thinks about the political implications of anything it does. That is, GOPers either just go along to get along, or they do something that is guaranteed to play into enemy hands.
The only good thing that I can say is that the “May Day” Communist/leftist rallies attracted very few immigrants, whether legal or illegal, and I think the radical leftist program doesn’t really have much support among immigrants, or at least, Hispanic immigrants (Aunt Zeituni is another matter). And I think the poor attendance revealed that.
However, I think the AZ law has really given Obama a golden opportunity and I think it was a big mistake.
You must have been one of the people posting on a thread that I saw (which I hope the mods removed) about “bag limits.” That attitude is exactly what is going to prevent the GOP from having any say in this matter.
“…it’s simply a restating of Federal law.’
You are correct, thank you.
But then you submit:
“…the law was so badly written that it looked as if its only targets were Hispanics…”
“This should have been done…by focusing specifically on enforcing some aspect of federal law…”
“…random stop and ID check implications…”
“…were freaked out by the “stop and frisk” implications of the law, which while they really weren’t specifically there, certainly were implied. Bad law, bad judgment.”
May I respectfully suggest you analyze the language of the final legislation?
You indicate you are a Spanish legal translator by profession, perhaps on this issue you should not give so much weight to the opinions of your clients.
"The obvious fear is that untold numbers of people will be challenged to prove their legal status in our country—sending further fear and fright across the immigrant community," Cardinal Mahoney said in his Fordham remarks.Note how Dolan, speaking of that "immigrant community" fails to acknowledge that many illegals are neither "immigrants" but mere temporary residents, grabbing the money while the getting is good, who merely plan to return to their homes when ready. And the term "community" is used to elevate and humanize them, to ignore and disregard their national illegality.
While in the same breath they total dismiss and denounce the fears, based on solid facts, not myths, of legitimate Americans, and that community, both natural and legal immigrants, and smearing them as quasi rascist xenophones:
Archbishop Dolan attributed the Arizona law's passage to a climate of fear during a time of tension and turmoil in society. "It's a supreme paradox in our American culture—where every person unless a Native American, is a descendant of immigrants—that we seem to harbor an ingrained fear of 'the other,' which, in our history, is usually the foreigner (immigrant), the Jew, the Catholic or the black," he wrote, saying that this is another of history's "periodic spasms of 'anti-immigrant' fever."
A lot of this supposedly Christian comes from mis-interpreting the phrase where we are told not to turn from the alien. Which is not the same as treating criminals.nice.
Let the cardinal leave unlocked the doors to St. Patrick’s cathedral and his nearby residence before anyone takes him seriously on this issue.
As I understand it, church doctrine is pretty clear on the obligation to obey the law.
The most irritating aspect of this load of slop is that the cardinal conflates LEGAL IMMIGRATION and ILLEGAL ALIENS. He might as well conflate those who receive assistance from the church and those who steal from the poorbox, or who rob parishoners on their way to mass.
These so-called religious people can go to hell or Mexico!
Where were these concerned Bishops, and Cardinals when their priests were molesting children...
________________________________________________________________________________
Amen Sister!!
Sodomites support illegals. Wow, whqat a shock!
alter boys?
Are they like transsexuals?
Actually, with your language, maybe you should be posting on a liberal forum. On this forum, you can express your opinion, I can express mine. We should be civil.
Unless you were one of the folks advocating a bag limit?
Your attitude is worse...
If the GOP has no say it's because they are all cowards and won't acknowledge the truth. At least your Cardinal and Bishop are pandering to their Hispanic flocks to keep up the numbers, what excuse for GOP cowardice?
Btw, Stop using the left's talking points and read the law. Support Arizona or shut your whining trap. Arizonans are tired of it.
What nobody here seems to understand is that immigration problems do not relate only to Spanish speakers. BTW, the people for whom I translate are wealthy Latin Americans, usually the owners of major corporations, and they’re not out there waiting for welfare payments from Arizona. I happen to know the situation better than you do.
In fact, many of these people are being persecuted/prosecuted by their new leftist governments, which wouldn’t even be in power now had we not abandoned Latin America. One of the reasons people are fleeing Latin America is that we have let socialism take over there. Read Mary Anastasia O’Grady in the Wall Street Journal if you want a realistic picture of this
The AZ bill was made to order for Obama. It was so poorly written that it sounded to me as if I could be searched and challenged simply because somebody didn’t like my looks.
In addition, it does nothing: I have friends and family in law enforcement in the West, and the problem is that the deportation is slow, sometimes impossible, and cops simply cannot possibly spend all their time searching through falsified documentation. There are some easy cases, such as those where several different IDs fall out of somebody’s pocket, but often there really isn’t any way of telling in the field.
The law was meant to be mainly symbolic, because it is unenforceable. Does everybody with a foreign accent get special attention? What about a German, a Brit, a Pole (the largest illegal group in most US cities), a Slav (many of whom are Muslim), one of the many illegal Chinese in your local Chinese restaurant, or Obama’s Auntie Zeituni - or is it only people with a Latin American accent, which is how it is being portrayed?
So the GOP was dumb to pass a law which was wide-open to be used by the Dems to claim that Republicans hated people from Spanish speaking countries and, secondly, which was unenforceable anyway and attracted national attention and has given the Dem propaganda mills material for a long time to come.
The AZ law is going to be what gets Obama’s soon to be proposed “amnesty” bill passed. He’d abandoned the whole thing until AZ played into his hands.
Nobody’s pandering to anybody. Think about who you want in this country and how you want them to come here.
We need a better policy: short term, easy immigration for working people from Latin America and NO immigration for people from Muslim countries. Instead, we have unrealistically low quotas and complicated rules for immigration from Latin America, no short-term immigration for Latin Americans, and generous policies for people from Muslim countries, including SE Asians, such as the Paki who tried to set fire to Times Square, ME people such as the family that produced Hasan, and Africans such as the huge number of Somalis and other America-haters who have gotten in on “family reunification.”
This is a chance for us to contribute to policy. Think about what you want to say. I’m not going to reply to you in the same tone in which you have addressed me, because I don’t speak to anybody that way. Sit around and be insulting to people if you want to, but you’ll have marginalized yourself and won’t have any influence on the decision.
“What nobody here seems to understand...”
Every time I read this opening it reminds me of the inane drivel posted at DU by some pseudo intellectual liberal ahole. Yeah. Like you.
You have not read the law. You make a serious substantive allegation against the contents of the legislation. I am calling you out.
Prove it.
You can easily access the bill here, at the LA Times blog of all places.
As an experienced practicing lawyer having read the law, I must conclude that your aspersions are completely unsupported and erroneous.
Furthermore, they and offensively defamatory to the authors and backers of the legislation...not to mention the 70+% of the Arizona citizenry. Your comments appear to be based on simplistic repetitions of the radically sweeping attacks of the administraion. Which are either sadly ignorant, or cunningly Saul-Alinsky crafted mischaracterizations and lies, of Obama's "ill-conceived" remarks.
So this deranged communist agit-prop is who you wish to echo?
Actually it is fully enforceable, as it is to be applied to those already lawfully detained or arrested.
Think of it not as a primary vehicle for the issue, but simply an long overdue, and more thorough legal follow-through on those already in custody. No longer will federal ICE negligence allow illegals to be released from incarceration without the issue being confronted. Also one of the bill's primary targets is the sanctuary city problem. This law will put them out of business. Ending the internal divisions within state law enforcement which of course creates unequality and the proverbial "house divided" situation.
While the progressive/communist movement yearns for this, true Americans are not ready to fall.
Sodomites?
I will defend The Church, my Mother, with at least as much gusto as I will defend my country. If have a disagreement with its leadership, I can't condemn the country -- that would be ridiculous. So with the Church.
I didn't post this thread so that all the anti-Catholic venom on FR could drain here.
Your word, not mine.
Sit around and be insulting to people if you want to, but you’ll have marginalized yourself and won’t have any influence on the decision.
You sit around and worry about being marginalized and having no influence, I'm concerned about my livelihood.
If the invasion from the South is not stemmed very soon, image and insults won't be on your radar.
Breathe the rarefied air of superiority all you want. But understand your tank's on E.
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.