Day Workers Thrust Virginia Town Into Illegal-Immigration Fight

Status
Not open for further replies.
[...]the fact that a lot of Christian churches appear to place their spiritual beliefs above the law, supporting illegals at all turns out of "compassion" and "humanitarianism." [...] If this is what we mean by faith-based initiatives then I'm against them.

But is that argument pervasive -or, at least in your opinion?

I agree that "a lot of Christian churches appear to place their spiritual beliefs above the law". Look at how Christian conservative thinking has suppressed the civil rights of those that are "gay".
 
I was born in Iowa, as were my folks.

I'm far away from Iowa but what I hear is the farmers' kids are going to the city and the farms are de facto being worked by immigrants (mostly illegal). The next step will be ownership, legally or de facto. Problem? Maybe, maybe not. Depends on whether they really become Americans.

Basura Blanca,

I'm pointing to an issue that is indeed a sticky one. Religious thought and libertarian/capitalist thought diverge on some rather key things in America.
 
First off -- on the point of this thread -- I think it's wrong of Herndon to build the shelter. As well, I'm just as anti-illegal-immigration as the next guy, but I must respond to the thread drift towards Church bashing
longeyes: There's another issue here that is bound to become inflammatory and divisive, viz., the fact that a lot of Christian churches appear to place their spiritual beliefs above the law.
I assume then that if the USA someday bans all gun ownership that you'll suppress your beliefs in the RKBA and not only turn in all your guns but also snitch on your buddies who haven't turned in their guns.

Oh, horrors! The Church is showing compassion to law breakers and sinners.
Kharn: Everyone knows they're illegal, but nobody will do anything about it and they're welcomed with open arms regardless of legality.
Do you expect the church to start checking passports at the doors -- or should the priests ban all poor Hispanics from Mass because "everyone knows" they're all illegal?
Kharn: The church even runs their school bus to whereever the "migrant workers" live to give them a ride to Mass every Sunday, and advertises the bilingual service all over the place.
There are millions of legal Hispanics immigrants in the D.C. area, but you know for sure -- based on a couple trips to Mass when visiting the folks -- that all the people from that neighborhood are all illegal. Yeah, the church should stop that bus even if many of the people in that neighborhood are legals. Heaven forbid that some illegals might -- dare I utter it lest it's true -- get to Church. Hide the children!

And Mass in Spanish??!!! :eek: For the millions of legal Hispanics? Horrors!
Kharn: The one that really cheeses me off is at Christmas time, when we're asked to pray for the "migrant workers" safe return to Mexico so they can celebrate the holidays with their families and then good luck on their attempt to cross back into the US.
You're kidding, right? At your folks' Church, they pray for the safety of all people regardless of their sins or law breaking. Yeah even though some of the "migrant workers" are legal, it's better to pray for none of them lest some of those illegals get covered by the prayer. Or, better yet, maybe the prayers should have caveats. "...except for the illegals, Lord. Smite them, Oh Heavenly Father." That should do it. God wouldn't get confused then.
 
"Republican gubernatorial candidate Jerry W. Kilgore said Monday that Virginia should not pay for centers to help day laborers, calling them the latest examples of society rewarding illegal immigrants.

"Kilgore said the creation of publicly financed gathering areas such as the one proposed in Herndon undermines the rule of law and "denigrates" citizens who immigrated to the country legally.

"'We face a fundamental decision in Virginia,' Kilgore told reporters in a conference call. 'Will we reward illegal behavior with hard-earned dollars from law-abiding citizens? I say the answer to this question should be an easy one: No."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2005/08/09/DI2005080900549.html
Just say “NO” to rewarding illegal immigrants.

Workforce Redux
by Doug Koelemay

Some Virginians were astounded in early December at news reports that concluded 44 percent of new jobs created in Virginia from 1990 to 2001 had been filled by immigrants.

They shouldn't have been surprised, but they should feel chagrined that Virginia businesses, political leaders and educational institutions couldn't respond faster and more efficiently to secure more of these new job opportunities for Virginians.

According to a new report from the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC), regrettably, the Commonwealth still is not in a position to do much about it. New proposals from Gov. Mark R. Warner may change that.

More than 13 million immigrants came to the United States in the last decade, according to a Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University in Boston.

Eight million joined the labor force, supplementing American workers in wage-sensitive jobs, but more impressively helping expand employment in highly skilled jobs that pay high wages, such as in the technology industry. The analysis shows nearly one in four held a technical, managerial or professional job.

Immigrants also had an above-average share of the nation's jobs in engineering, computer science and the physical sciences.

http://www.baconsrebellion.com/Issues/12-09-02/Workforce_redux.htm
Immigrants filled 44 percent of new jobs created from 1990 to 2001, and filled one in four technical, managerial or professional job, plus had an above-average share of the nation's jobs in engineering, computer science and the physical sciences.

WOW! Cheap labor goes along ways! Mexico should be proud - Just say “Yes” to rewarding illegal immigrants.
 
"I assume then that if the USA someday bans all gun ownership that you'll suppress your beliefs in the RKBA and not only turn in all your guns but also snitch on your buddies who haven't turned in their guns.

Oh, horrors! The Church is showing compassion to law breakers and sinners. "

My belief in gun ownership has nothing to do with my awareness that certain religious organizations in America tend to forget to render to Caesar. We do have laws hereabouts that apply to all citizens and residents of this fair land. I expect Churches to abide by those laws and to instruct their members to abide by them, not promote policies that "transcend" civil and criminal law.

I don't want to make this a religious issues; it is certain church organizations that are doing that, either out of what I see as misguided idealism or perhaps, less nobly, merely to expand their constituency. Religious organizations that are found actively breaking the law should lose their tax exemption.
 
"I assume then that if the USA someday bans all gun ownership that you'll suppress your beliefs in the RKBA and not only turn in all your guns but also snitch on your buddies who haven't turned in their guns.

Oh, horrors! The Church is showing compassion to law breakers and sinners. "

The irony here is that gun owners have received scant support and endorsement from religious organizations. Maybe they have forgotten that self-defense and defense against tyranny is an inalienable, God-given right? I believe that some religious groups have a problem with the concept of self-defense and others have themselves, I'm sorry, tyrannical leanings.
 
The irony here is that gun owners have received scant support and endorsement from religious organizations. Maybe they have forgotten that self-defense and defense against tyranny is an inalienable, God-given right? I believe that some religious groups have a problem with the concept of self-defense and others have themselves, I'm sorry, tyrannical leanings.
You are right that (some) churches are bad on the RKBA. That doesn't change the fact that you're out of line for berating churches that <gasp> show compassion to sinners and law breakers (regardless of the law).

WOOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHH. That was my point going right past your left ear.
 
Religious organizations that are found actively breaking the law should lose their tax exemption.
If they are breaking the law, yes. (Within reason, of course. Letting kids drink wine is breaking the law, but we're talking about more serious crimes.)

What laws do you think they are breaking? Surely you are not upset that they're letting illegals come to Church (that's Kharn's complaint).

So what laws are you talking about? What's you're evidence?
 
Right now guns are legal. When they're not get back to me. We have some time left to work out this amazing paradox.

Compassion is a good thing--up to a point. When it becomes a form of unctuous suicide, well, I'm agin' it, sorry. I think evolved nations are a balance of compassion and self-protecting strength. It is easy to be compassionate when you are in effect handing the bill for your moral enlightenment to those around you.

I am out of line, you're right, as were all the Americans, even before there was an America, who said "No, enough!" I'd like to believe the impulse that drove them was anti-tyranny, even though the irony of history is that some anti-tyrants arent't that open-minded themselves.

Don't assume I am attacking all religion because I point to what I see as inconsistencies, contradictions, or self-defeating policies in the actions of some churches and some church members.

I welcome your response, though; it shows that there is indeed a wellspring of controversy inside our national commitment to the power of faith.
 
Immigrants filled 44 percent of new jobs created from 1990 to 2001, and filled one in four technical, managerial or professional job, plus had an above-average share of the nation's jobs in engineering, computer science and the physical sciences.

Engineering, computer science, and physical sciences require advanced degrees. You'll be hard pressed to find an illegal immigrant with a bachelor of science, but there are plenty of legal immigrants who are willing to work hard and study hard in order to compete in today's job market.

If an organization wishes to aid a human being who also happens to be a criminal, I have no trouble with that so long as they REPORT THE PRESENCE OF THE CRIMINAL at the same time. Of course, given the stellar way INS is handling deportation it wouldn't matter.
 
Compassion is a good thing--up to a point. When it becomes a form of unctuous suicide, well, I'm agin' it, sorry. I think evolved nations are a balance of compassion and self-protecting strength. It is easy to be compassionate when you are in effect handing the bill for your moral enlightenment to those around you.
Again, I ask you:

1) What laws are the churches breaking with their supposedly misguided compassion?

2) What's your evidence?
Right now guns are legal. When they're not get back to me.
So you won't address the point of whether you'll suppress your beliefs and follow a gun ban to the tee. "Render unto Ceasar" and all that. OK, I'll give you a pass and let that point drop.
 
We are talking about ILLEGAL immigrants here, not LEGAL immigrants.

The groups I'm referencing do not see "migrants" as criminals, they see them as present and future parishioners.

The disarmament movement, both micro and macro, is heavily fueled by ardent "believers." That's not exactly unexpected given the general thrust of the New Testament. How defense of liberty and self-defense can be reconciled with the gospels of love and compassion I will leave to clever theologians.
 
We are talking about ILLEGAL immigrants here, not LEGAL immigrants.
I never suggested otherwise. You and I probably are in close agreement about illegal immigration. We aren't in agreement about whether churches are breaking laws when showing illegal immigrants "compassion."
The groups I'm referencing do not see "migrants" as criminals, they see them as present and future parishioners.
Really? How do you know that?

Also, You've implied that churches are somehow breaking the law in the way they show compassion for illegals. For the third time:

1) What laws are churches breaking?

2) What's your evidence?
The disarmament movement, both micro and macro, is heavily fueled by ardent "believers." That's not exactly unexpected given the general thrust of the New Testament. How defense of liberty and self-defense can be reconciled with the gospels of love and compassion I will leave to clever theologians.
Wow. You really missed the point. Here, I'll spell it out.

A) You criticized churches for allegedly placing their beliefs above the law.

B) I gave you a scenario where you might be faced with choosing between your beliefs and the law -- a gun ban -- and asked you what you'd do.
 
It is against federal law to knowingly aid and abett an illegal alien. If forced to, I'll look it up again, but hopefully, someone without a dinosaur for a comp will.
Biker :)
 
Engineering, computer science, and physical sciences require advanced degrees. You'll be hard pressed to find an illegal immigrant with a bachelor of science, but there are plenty of legal immigrants who are willing to work hard and study hard in order to compete in today's job market.
According to Koelemay

The Northern Virginia Technology Council and Virginia's Center for Innovative Technology found in a survey of technology companies that 19,000 technology jobs that paid twice the average wage of other jobs in Virginia were going unfilled. Pressure began to build on the federal government to boost the number of H1-B professional visas issued to foreign workers, something the federal government eventually did.
Which goes back to “Some Virginians should feel chagrined that Virginia businesses, political leaders and educational institutions couldn't respond faster and more efficiently to secure more of these new job opportunities for Virginians.”
 
It is against federal law to knowingly aid and abett an illegal alien. If forced to, I'll look it up again, but hopefully, someone without a dinosaur for a comp will.
Yes, I know that -- and I agreed (in post #35) that if Churches are actually breaking the law, they should be held legally responsible.

However, in this thread the only supposed wrong-doings by churches that I've seen alleged (by Kharn) are:

A) Sending church buses into neighborhoods suspected of containing illegals.
B) Letting people who might be illegals come to church.
C) Having Mass in Spanish
D) Praying for people who might be illegals.

None of those qualify as aiding and abetting. (And to be fair, Kharn isn’t claiming those actions are illegal).

Longeyes still hasn't given any evidence about how the compassion speaks of involves illegal acts.
 
Compassion's not illegal. I'm not even arguing that it should be, in case you're wondering.

There are groups going beyond compassion and actively involved in helping illegal aliens come to the U.S. and find refuge here. Don't tell me there aren't. I suppose it would be too much to ask churches to note who among their flocks are here illegally and report them. That would, of course, violate their principles of putting their religious and expand-the-membership beliefs first.

If you don't see a problem, okay, you don't. A lot of other people do.

What I said about the conflict inherent in self-defense versus pacifism holds. It's not going away.

I believe that self-defense and defense against tyranny are inherent and inalienable human rights more primal than "government." They are grounded in my sense of what it means, ideally, to be fully human. Would I disarm myself or abet general disarming? No. I can justify that on libertarian grounds without reaching out to specific religious beliefs that too oten get entangled in sectarian issues.
 
longeyes: There are groups going beyond compassion and actively involved in helping illegal aliens come to the U.S. and find refuge here. Don't tell me there aren't.
Actually, I never claimed one way or the other. I even agreed (in post #35) that if churches are breaking the law, they should be held legally responsible -- and thus I acknowledged the possibility that some churches are committing illegal acts related to immigration.

I have simply asked you to support your allegations. For the fourth time:

1) What laws are churches breaking?

2) What's your evidence?
longeyes: I believe that self-defense and defense against tyranny are inherent and inalienable human rights more primal than "government." They are grounded in my sense of what it means, ideally, to be fully human. Would I disarm myself or abet general disarming? No. I can justify that on libertarian grounds without reaching out to specific religious beliefs that too oten get entangled in sectarian issues.
Translation, "Other people are bad when they place their beliefs above the law, but I'm good and brave." :rolleyes:

Of course, you haven't shown that the churches actually are placing their beliefs above the law -- so you're falling doubly flat.
 
deus vult

Cuch',

Obviously I struck a nerve. Ice usually helps in cases like that.

I see no parallel between the primal right of self-defense/defense 'gainst tyranny and encouraging illegal aliens to take root in America. Not all government-defying beliefs are the same, you know. You do know, don't you? I am no better or braver than anyone else but I am definitely not aiding and abetting illegal immigration, either by word or deed.

Harboring illegal aliens is, I believe, a crime. I'll leave it to the authorities to do the investigations, not that in this current social climate I expect them to. I don't work for ICE but I guess they have caught the germ of "compassion," as you put it, since it's obvious they choose not to look in plain sight for the people they purport to be trying to stop from immigrating.

I can see why "religious" discussions are actively discouraged on this forum.
 
longeyes: Harboring illegal aliens is, I believe, a crime. I'll leave it to the authorities to do the investigations, not that in this current social climate I expect them to.
Thank you for admitting that you have no evidence to back up your allegations. Maybe churches are committing illegal acts. Maybe they're not. But you don't really know.
longeyes: I see no parallel between the primal right of self-defense/defense 'gainst tyranny and encouraging illegal aliens to take root in America.
The point is that you have a double standard.

A) When others place their beliefs above the law = bad!
B) When longeyes places his beliefs above the law = good, cuz those beliefs are primal!
longeyes: I can see why "religious" discussions are actively discouraged on this forum.
This isn't really a religious discussion. You alleged illegal activity by organizations (that happen to be religious), and I've asked you to support your allegations with evidence. I'd ask for the same evidence if you leveled your allegations against the ACLU, the NRA, the Boy Scouts, Wal-Mart, the Libertarian Party or the Oak Street Cat Lovers Club.

You failed to supply evidence. You wrongly made allegations of criminal activity without having the facts to back up those allegations.
 
Cuchulainn:
D) Praying for people who might be illegals.
We were specifically asked to pray that they were not mistreated by their coyotes and others they met during their journey one year. I doubt many legal migrant workers deal with coyotes. :uhoh:
And the migrant ones quickly leave the hall every time one of the men in the men's club shows up at by-donation dinners (he wears his FBI baseball cap everywhere), while those of Mexican descent that live in the area year-round smile and wave at the guy. Why would legal workers be afraid of anyone related to the police? :scrutiny:

Kharn
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top