Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Seventh Day Adventist Forum / Re: Immigration over conversion
« Last post by Amo on Today at 12:31:27 »

Article below from link above. Emphasis is mine.

Catholics should work with Biden to get his immigration reform bill passed.

On his first day in office, President Joseph R. Biden Jr. introduced wide-ranging legislation, the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021, to reform the nation’s immigration system. The “Biden bill” marks the beginning of a new national debate on immigration that will, inevitably, feature many of the unresolved issues of debates past.

The introduction of the bill on the first day of the administration signals that President Biden is willing to spend political capital in his first term to get it passed—capital that two of his predecessors, George W. Bush and Barack Obama, were unwilling to spend until their second term. As a consequence, both Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama failed in their attempts to pass a bill.

It also represents a unique opportunity for the Catholic community to work with the administration to finally get immigration reform over the finish line.

The legislation reflects of many of the policy priorities set forth by the U.S. and Mexican bishops in their 2003 pastoral letter “Strangers No Longer: Together on the Journey of Hope.” It includes a broad legalization program with a path to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented persons in the nation, long a goal of the church. It also reduces waiting times for family reunification in the legal immigration system, strengthens protections for refugees and asylum seekers
, and addresses the root causes of flight from nations like El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

Of course, the introduction of the bill, while welcome, is the easy part of the process. As history has shown, passing legislation like this in a relatively intact form through both chambers of a closely divided Congress will be exponentially more difficult. Difficult compromises may have to be made to ensure some measure of success.

One lesson the Trump era has taught us is to recognize the depth of opposition to immigrants in parts of the electorate—including, sadly, among the Catholic population. In past debates, proponents of immigration reform have underestimated the political strength of the opposition. For opponents, effective messaging (using scare terms like “amnesty” and “open borders”) combined with strong grassroots activism has proven to be an effective, and ultimately winning, strategy to stop legislation.

Supporters of immigration reform, including Catholic advocates, will need to counter the many misleading assertions by opponents through education and community organizing. The U.S. bishops’ Justice for Immigrants campaign is primed to lead the way in this effort.

However, several issues will emerge during the debate that will require careful navigation. They represent longstanding disagreements that have torpedoed past immigration reform bills.

The scope and benefits of a legalization program.   The Biden bill provides a path to citizenship to all 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country, with DACA and T.P.S. recipients and farmworkers eligible to apply for a green card immediately. Other immigrants who arrived in the country before Jan. 1, 2021, would receive temporary legal status and be eligible to apply for a green card after five years and for citizenship after eight years.

Some legislators, even those who support immigration reform, will seek to shrink the number of immigrants who qualify for any legalization program. Advocates may be confronted with the agonizing decision of accepting legal status for some portion of the undocumented population but not for everyone. Republican legislators may oppose a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, preferring the creation of a renewable legal status that requires an immigrant to use legal avenues already in law to attain citizenship.

Family-based immigration.  Although the Biden bill reduces wait times for family reunification through the family visa system—a position that the U.S. bishops strongly support—it is likely that some elected officials will push to eliminate certain family categories in favor of employment, or “merit-based” visas. They argue that the family immigration system should focus on immediate family members—spouses and children—rather than extended family members.

In the 2013 immigration bill, for example, the family categories including adult children and siblings were eliminated and replaced with employment-based visas. Supporters of family-based immigration, including Catholic advocates, will face the challenge of expediting family-based visas without sacrificing these categories.

Future flows of migrants.  One issue that has undermined past immigration bills has been “future flows” of migrants seeking to work in the agriculture, construction and service sectors, among others. Business interests have traditionally pushed for a large “guestworker” or “temporary worker” program to provide work visas to migrant workers.

Labor unions and immigrant advocates have generally opposed these programs because they do not include adequate worker protections, just wages or permanent legal status for workers. The Biden bill increases the number of employment-based visas in the system but does not include a “guestworker” program. Even so, the issue will emerge during the debate and could derail any final agreement.

Enforcement.  The Biden bill enhances the use of technology at the border but otherwise does not add new enforcement programs to help deter or control undocumented migration. For many legislators, this makes the bill a nonstarter. They argue that immigration enforcement must be strengthened in exchange for any legalization program, so that future irregular migration can be better managed. (Some legislators in the past have argued that no legalization program can proceed until the border is “secure”—a goal that has been left ill-defined.) The question for advocates will be what kind of new enforcement programs are acceptable, if any.

Despite these challenging issues, the passage of an immigration reform bill during the 117th Congress is achievable, provided that supporters are willing to accept some trade-offs and not make, as the saying goes, the perfect the enemy of the good.

This time the fate of immigration reform legislation could be different than in years past, as polls show that Americans have grown more supportive of immigrants during the Trump era, not less. The Catholic community, working with a Catholic president, can play a key role in ensuring a positive outcome.

So much for separation of church and state. Political subversion from within, from the one religion of the world which is also a literal foreign nation state.

Seventh Day Adventist Forum / Re: Immigration over conversion
« Last post by Amo on Today at 12:16:16 »

Quoted article below from link above.

Catholic sisters make Advent plea to Biden: End 'immoral' immigration rule
Dec 6, 2021

WASHINGTON, D.C. — They sang Advent hymns in front of the White House Dec. 3, hoping to get the ear of the president so he could consider lifting what they see as a health rule that hurts people trying to find refuge at the southern border.

Along with a large group of supporters and associates, about 80 women religious from 24 congregations around the country marched and circled an area in front of the White House singing and carrying signs that read: "Catholic Sisters say: End the Immoral Use of Title 42."

What they were referring to was Title 42 of the Public Health Safety Act, a policy the Trump administration began using in March 2020 as knowledge of rising infections of the coronavirus began to surge in the U.S. -- and around the world. The Biden administration has kept it in place to the consternation of immigration advocates, who say the rule is just another pretext to keep migrants out.

"We gather this morning as one family in you, in solidarity with everyone who you guided to flee their homes and journey to this land in search of a safe and fruitful life," Mary J. Novak, executive director of Network, said in an opening prayer.

Network, a Catholic social justice lobby, was one of the groups that organized the event.

Along with a group that included Sisters of Mercy, Ursulines, Maryknoll, Comboni Missionaries, Dominicans, Sisters of St. Francis, among others, and several groups that work with migrants, such as the Jesuit-run Kino Border Initiative, the Catholic Legal Immigration Network Inc. and the Haitian Bridge Alliance, the demonstrators shouted with a microphone from a public park in an area in front of the president's residence.

Sisters and supporters attended from New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, New Mexico Arizona, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, North Carolina, Maryland, Missouri and Massachusetts.

Some kept walking in front of the White House as others gathered to talk about the reasons that had moved them to join the group.

Novak recalled the Advent journey of the Holy Family, who had to flee, looking for refuge, comparing it to the situation of present-day migrants trying to find similar safety, but from gangs, poverty and different kinds of violence. 

"We pray for our national leaders, the president and his administration, to open their hearts to the suffering of our siblings at the border whose human dignity is being denied," she said. "Please guide us, merciful God, in our sacred work to end the rules and practices that are causing such suffering to our human holy family."

Biden administration officials have said it's up to the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention to decide when to lift Title 42, since it's not an immigration policy but a public health measure. With a lack of control over the coronavirus, advocates worry that concerns over variants, such as omicron, will only be used politically to further rules and measures that keep migrants out even as their plight only worsens.

"A new COVID variant is never a good thing, obviously for public health, but definitely from a perspective that it can be weaponized and used as an excuse by the government to extend Title 42 and other border policies," said Chelsea Sachau, of the Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project.

Sachau was quoted in a Nov. 30 article on the website of Fronteras Desk, a collaboration project run by various radio stations in Arizona.

Sister Tracey Horan, a member of the Sisters of Providence of St. Mary-of-the-Woods in Indiana, and associate director of education and advocacy for the Kino Border Initiative, told of the human toll her organization has seen at the border caused by Title 42.

She spoke about a family of five from Guatemala traveling north because of economic conditions and worries that their children would become involved with gangs or suffer violence at home.

"Upon arrival they quickly learned that Title 42 would block them," she said.

Seeing no other way to come across, they took to the river as the father carried a toddler but lost control in the current. A diaper kept the child afloat long enough for her brother to grab her and pull her to safety. But the father floated down the river and was caught by Border Patrol agents, she said.

"This is the kind of desperation that Title 42 causes," she said. "Because migrants are no longer allowed to apply for asylum, they feel they have no alternative. That's a risk. The only chance they have is going back to where they came from, but it is not an option."

As long as the Biden administration keeps Title 42 in place, "they are emboldening organized crime and are directly responsible to deaths of men, women and children seeking protection at the southern border," she said.

Sherly Debrosse, of the Haitian Bridge Alliance, said people can hide behind a lot of different excuses for limiting immigration but rules and regulations boil down to one thing: racism. She urged others to consider the human toll some of the rules and regulations take.

"We would make such a grave mistake to separate immigration issues from race issues in this country," she said. "This is not about politics. This is about rights. This is about pregnant women. This is about babies. This is about human beings."

Ronnate Asirwatham, government relations director for Network, said Title 42 wasn't the only method the administration has used to keep migrants out.

She referenced the Biden administration's announcement it is reinstituting the Migrant Protection Protocols, a Trump-era policy that keeps migrants waiting on the Mexico side until their asylum cases can be heard by U.S. immigration courts.

Although the Biden administration had ended the protocols earlier this year, in August a judge with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas told administration officials they had to continue the policy, saying officials had not ended it properly.

On Aug. 24 the U.S. Supreme Court refused to block the judge's ruling and ruled the administration had to restart the policy.

It resumed Dec. 6 at one location -- with others to follow -- and local reporters said about 30 people had been sent back to the Mexico side on its first day.

"As justice seekers, as Americans, but especially as Catholics, we are ashamed that President Biden has locked the door at our southern border to our immigrant siblings," Asirwatham said. "We are here today to show our love and our solidarity."

A man in his 30s named Santiago told the crowd his story of fleeing Honduras, subsequently traveling to Mexico, where he lived for 11 years until it, too, became too dangerous to live. A person was burned alive in front the house he and his family shared, and they made a decision to leave, he said. But not all were able to cross to the U.S.

"Title 42 has separated my family," he said. "My children ask, 'Dad, when will we be able to see you?'"

Those gathered near the White House asked Biden to put himself in the shoes of the migrants stuck on the other side of the border with family as criminals surround them.

"What I want most to say to President Biden and to all of you today is that we know things do not have to be this way," said Sister Horan. "This is a conscious choice we are making as a nation."

She said immigrant advocates were not asking for a complete dismantling of the immigration system but simply asking for restoration system of asylum, humane treatment and due process.

"My prayer is that we don't just wait and hope for the light of the world to come," she said. "But that we (make) the conscious choice to help it shine brightly by the way we receive our migrating sisters and brothers."
General Discussion Forum / Re: Creation scientists
« Last post by Amo on Today at 11:59:45 »
There are few here that revert to personal insult and attack more than you, Amo. Your attacks on Catholics is brutal as are your attacks on science and any scientists that might disagree with you. So it would be best if you just climbed down off of that high horse you think you are riding. My attacks on you are almost always a like response to your attack on your accusation of my lack of faith.

Same crap, no meat, just 4WD says so. What high horse, I just included myself among those who share their opinions of others, which has nothing to do with addressing the actual facts of the matter.

What brutal attacks upon Catholics are you referring to. Do you consider factual accounts of events and beliefs to be brutal attacks? Give an example of such brutal attacks, and I will point out your error, and the many others who also see these very things for what they are. From whom I get more than just a little of the information I share. Bring some meat, not just 4WD says so accusations.
It really doesn't matter if the original conversation was in Hebrew/Aramaic; it matters only what language the gospel of John was originally written in.  Are you suggesting that John was not originally written in Greek?
I think there is a good possibility that it was originally in Aramaic.   
To the OP:

The original conversation was not in either Latin or Greek.  It was in Hebrew/Aramaic.

From the George Lamsa translation of the earliest Aramaic texts:

3.5 Jesus answered and said to him, Truly truly I say to you, If a man is not born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.  6  What is born of flesh is flesh, and what is born of Spirit is spirit.

It really doesn't matter if the original conversation was in Hebrew/Aramaic; it matters only what language the gospel of John was originally written in.  Are you suggesting that John was not originally written in Greek?
Theology Forum / Re: Salvation is to the Individual
« Last post by RB on Today at 10:30:02 »
I'm having trouble with my computer, I might need to take this slow boy into the shop and see what is wrong. It's doing some tricks on me, and I'm too old to make it stop.  ::smile::  Maybe I will figure this out before the day ends, good chance I will not. I wish Alan were closer to me~my grandson who is my "go to" guy is on his honeymoon and I'm not going to call him...... he's probably got a DO NOT disturb hanging on his door.  ::smile::
General Discussion Forum / Re: Creation scientists
« Last post by 4WD on Today at 10:28:25 »
I understand your need to revert to personal insult, and or attack.
There are few here that revert to personal insult and attack more than you, Amo. Your attacks on Catholics is brutal as are your attacks on science and any scientists that might disagree with you. So it would be best if you just climbed down off of that high horse you think you are riding. My attacks on you are almost always a like response to your attack on your accusation of my lack of faith.
Theology Forum / Re: Comparing Today With Yesterday
« Last post by Texas Conservative on Today at 10:23:59 »
-"My house is 1800 Sq ft and the congregation is growing, much too large for my house. Add to that, I'm not necessarily comfortable having strangers in my home that I know nothing about. No one else seems to want to split off and take the overflow to their own house, and besides that, people seem to like the message here and enjoy the internal discussion"

-"Perhaps renting a hall would be good, we could have snacks and beverages"

-"The hall is working, but with insurance and permits it's costing $400 a pop, twice a week is $3200, and the offerings don't begin to cover that expense"

-"Maybe I could purchase a building, if I shop around I could find something that could bring the expenditures down significantly"

-"The building is great, we found a nice property within our budget, and folks are quite willing to offer their time and skills to help fix it up"

-"We've renovated the basement and created a kitchen where we can serve soup and sandwiches on Fridays, and cook some Turkeys on Thanksgiving and Christmas"

-"The congregation is still growing, and the offerings more that cover the expenses. We use the surplus to have a small rainy day account, and to help out some of the needy people around town"

-"Looking back to when we started with half a dozen people in our home, it's amazing what God can do when we allow Him to lead the way"

Alan, Alan, Alan....

We know the issue here is that by going after a building, they have allowed in cancer.   ::pondering::
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10