Invasion?

Are you watching what some people have called the “invasion” taking place across the border from Mexico into these USA (aka “provincias pérdidas”)?

Here is but one of many stories, but this caught my eye because of a good point made:

(CNSNews.com) – The local government of Murrietta, a city in Southern California, is speaking out against the federal government’s forced transfer of illegal immigrants from detainment centers in Texas to their local border patrol facility.

Expressing some consternation, Murrietta City Council member Randon Lane told local affiliate NBC4, “We have money to take them from Texas, fly them to San Diego, bus them up to Murietta, and then turn around and ship them off to some other place – we have the money to do that – we just don’t have the money to secure our borders? So, yes, it seems very odd.”

The transfer is part of the federal government’s response to the massive wave of illegal immigrants who have been crossing the Rio Grande Valley Sector of the U.S.-Mexico since February. The Department of Homeland Security reports that more than 181,000 illegals have crossed since October 2013, far outpacing projections and with so sign of stopping anytime soon.

[...]

And then there is this:

What to do?   This is orchestrated.

Really… what to do?

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in The Campus Telephone Pole, The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

55 Responses to Invasion?

  1. Priam1184 says:

    The aim of American radicals (many of whom occupy high positions in the government now) is to destroy the United States. What they think they are going to replace it with I do not know, but they do possess a lot of malice towards the United States so all they might be thinking about is annihilating it for no other reason than they hate it. Internal chaos is always a good way to destroy any society and pretty much every act of the Obama administration has seemed designed to sow chaos and anarchy in our society. There may be nothing that can be done to stop this. Maybe in five years someone will start a campaign to hold a referendum in New Mexico, Arizona, etc. like the referendum that was held in Crimea earlier this year. Maybe that is their plan who knows? American society is so myopic and stupid that it just might work.

    Nations don’t last forever. They are born, they grow up, they flourish, they get rich, they get fat, old, and senile off of their riches, and they die. Catholics should know better than anyone else that this is the case. How many times has the Church seen this? So what to do? Pray. And start preparing your children (if you have any) for the possibility of life without the United States. Our society is insane and could come apart in a couple of hours under the right circumstances.

  2. David in T.O. says:

    Ask the Israelis how to build a fence.

  3. benedetta says:

    This seems to be becoming a matter of foreign policy and not just a matter of immigration and borders from our perspective only. When a person wishes to emigrate, they have to prove that they will be able to be gainfully employed here. Further they have to show that their type of work is something that this country is in need of. The legal immigration process, for a great many families, is inhumane. This “process” too, sounds totally inhumane, for all involved.

    I see that now this is termed a “refugee” crisis and not one of immigration. It is true that in the prior waves of immigration this country has seen, the public safety net via taxes did not yet exist.

    However currently families are taxed to the maximum, wages are far from keeping up with food prices or necessities, and employment opportunities for gradates are far and few between. So of course this number will have to be supported via the public safety net, which is already strained, in an economy where work is not available.

    I think to put these refugees, and American citizens, in this position is appalling. Where is the leadership? What is the plan, for these unaccompanied minors (horrific) and for families already established here, and our failing economy?

  4. Gregg the Obscure says:

    These people need water, food and shelter. Civilian federal offices and governmental educational institutions can be used for such on a temporary basis until arrangements can be made for their safe relocation to appropriate permanent homes – likely those they were paid or coerced to leave.

    Criminal proceedings ought to be brought against those who have convinced people to come here in violation of not only civil laws, but basic precautions for their own safety. It’s evident that there are highly influential politicians of both parties in the US, various domestic and international business interests and foreign governments involved in bringing this about, so the chances of any prosecutions are unfortunately tiny.

    If this is the sort of thing that the administration dares to do before formal “lame duck” status, the thought of what might start in November is bracing.

  5. tcreek says:

    According to Wikipedia, there are around 113.4 million Catholics in Mexico and the 6 Latin American countries. Catholics comprise 74.8% of the total population of 151.7 million.

    Are the bishops in those countries engaged in solving this humanitarian problem? Pope Francis?

    I guess it is easier to let the problem fall upon the resources of the United States and their terrible capitalistic system.

  6. jflare says:

    benedetta,
    We now consider it inhumane to ask someone what they intend to do that we actually need?
    Considering the financial strain that this nation has already taken on, that sounds more like a rational question to me.

  7. Bea says:

    What part of illegal don’t they understand?
    It is an invasion, indeed, and unfortunately promulgated by our very own bishops.

    Info below from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americanism_(heresy)
    AMERICANISM-THE HERESY
    Pope Leo XIII wrote to Cardinal James Gibbons and wrote the encyclical “Testem Benevolentiae Nostra” January 22, 1899.
    In it, it partially states:
    This document condemned the following doctrines or tendencies:
    1. undue insistence on interior initiative in the spiritual life, as leading to disobedience
    2. attacks on religious vows, and disparagement of the value of religious orders in the modern world
    3. minimizing Catholic doctrine
    4. minimizing the importance of spiritual direction

    (Sound familiar?)
    Cardinal Gibbons and other prelates denied this was happening, but it was:

    John Ireland, archbishop of Saint Paul, Minnesota and a foremost modernizer, had to walk on eggs to avoid condemnation for his views. Ireland sought to adapt the social and religious values of the Catholic Church to American political and cultural, especially religious liberty, separation of church and state, cooperation with non-Catholics, and lay participation in ecclesiastical decisionmaking. Many of his ideas were implicitly condemned by Pope Leo XIII’s ‘Testem Benevolentiae’ (1899) as a heresy and Americanism. Nevertheless, Ireland continued to promote his views.

    (Does the above sound familiar, too?) This explains the undue involvement of our present-day bishops who have bought into Archbishop John Ireland’s heretical ideas and have forsaken the spiritual direction the people need for holiness. Spiritual direction does not call forAmnesty, for disobedience to our countries laws and aiding and abetting the law-breakers (invaders) who are really looking for freebies. They are instructed into what they must say (how to lie) to be allowed in our country, all for the false sense of “compassion”. When the money runs out and we are taxed out of existence, where will this money come from? Our bishops are toying with anarchy in our country and deeply involved in the Democratic Party. It seems to me their “Americanism” has put the party-line ahead of the Catholic Church and it’s teachings.

  8. RJHighland says:

    My prayers go out to all these children that have been abandoned by their parents and their Church if they have one. Each one of them must be in a kind of hell on earth. Neither their family, their church or country of origin have offered them an opportinity and their last hope is flee to what they percieve as the American dream. That American dream is now over 17 trillion dollars in debt to other countries because our poorly managed governement. How does a country in so much debt still give money away to other countries? Are we as a people required to accept everybody that wants to come into the country? What should the responsibility be for the country of origin? If the American Bishops want to sponser all of these people more power to them. Find sponsers for these folks in the Church and raise them in the faith, just don’t put it on the American tax payers but on individuals and origanizations that can and should help these people and help them better than the U.S. government ever could. The Bishops probably could have afforded it too if they hadn’t had to spend so much money paying for crimes of priests on adelosent boys. How many billions have been spend on that cause at present date, how many dioceses have filed for bankrupcy? Just saying. If you want to come to this country to work and better yourself and your family great come on over! If your coming here because of our incredible social welfare programs and you want the government to take care of you, well we don’t have any positions open in that category at present we have an incredible surplus of people already here that are sucking the life blood out of the hard working people and innovators of this nation. So Bishops stop ordain priests that are attracted to altar boys and spend less time preparing for the next gay pride parade or social justice rallies and you could have alot more money and time to help these folks.

  9. Kathleen10 says:

    I do not know how this president gets away with this. His intention to “change” America is coming to fruition. If I were the governor of a state where immigrants were dumped, I would spend the money to fly them to their country of origin and keep doing it. This would be cheaper than generations of social services (by far) and would also slow down the stream of immigrants when they realized they could not stay anyway. All this flying people around is absurd. Fly them to their country of origin. This entire situation is absurd, a president changing the demographics of a nation single-handedly. He is far, far worse than anything I dreamed up before he was elected, and I do not know how or why he is not impeached. At least.

  10. Dienekes says:

    “This entire situation is absurd, a president changing the demographics of a nation single-handedly.”

    Kathleen10, most of the impetus for this came from St. Teddy Kennedy in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 which completely revamped immigration preferences to favor Third World countries and “family reunification”. That may or may not have been a good thing, but no one consulted the American people as to what they thought. The same thing happened in Great Britain, but even more under the radar.

    The more you learn about the politics of immigration the more you will want to take a long shower with Lava soap.

  11. The Egyptian says:

    here is a good start, and from a UC prof to boot

    http://www.infowars.com/uc-professor-immigration-influx-is-about-re-education-of-society/

    and I might add the US bishops are an accessory with the constant call for amnesty, what part of illegal does the “small c” Catholic Church in America not understand, I have been lectured by several priests and our deacon on the subject, I should be ashamed for wanting the laws obeyed. Well now we see lawlessness first hand, I hope some of these religious have a plan to help feed and cloth these ” immigrants” or to quote Jay Leno, undocumented democrats

  12. JackG says:

    I believe this invasion is the work of the Obama regime. They’ve been planning for it for a long time.

    On January 29, 2014 [NOTE THE DATE], the Government Services Administration issued a Request for Information:

    Escort Services for Unaccompanied Alien Children
    Solicitation Number: BERKS-RFI
    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Office: Immigration & Customs Enforcement
    Location: ICE-OAQ-DM

    Here is the link: Government Services Administration RFI

    Here is an excerpt from the Introduction of the RFI:

    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has a continuing and mission critical responsibility for accepting custody of Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) from U.S. Border Patrol and other Federal agencies and transporting these juveniles to Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) shelters located throughout the continental United States.

    * * *.

    The Contractor shall provide unarmed escort staff, including management, supervision, manpower, training, certifications, licenses, drug testing, equipment, and supplies necessary to provide on-demand escort services for non-criminal/non-delinquent unaccompanied alien children ages infant to 17 years of age, seven (7) days a week, 365 days a year. Transport will be required for either category of UAC or individual juveniles, to include both male and female juveniles. There will be approximately 65,000 UAC in total: 25% local ground transport, 25% via ICE charter and 50% via commercial air.

    * * *

    Why would anyone issue such an RFI if they didn’t have some expectation that the services would be needed? What would cause them to have the expectation? How did they come up with 65,000? Coincidence? I think not.

  13. Gretchen says:

    I see this latest iteration of the Tower of Babel crashing sooner rather than later. What’s left afterwards is anybody’s guess.

  14. lana says:

    What to do? “When I was hungry….”
    “Whoever accepts one of these little ones…”
    reading in Fox news, these are refugees from the crime and violence of gangs in Central America, and I do not doubt these gangs exist because of USA drug consumption.

  15. lana says:

    sorry, abc news. it looks also like unintended consequences of laws passed under Bush to protect victims of human trafficking.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Health/teen-death-highlights-health-hazards-caffeine-powder/story?id=24397704&source=hp

  16. lana says:

    One last comment.

    Given that we have aborted a huge part of the younger generation, we ought to be happy God is sending some to us. If you can only think of the bottom line, you ought to be happy there will be someone to pay for your social security.

    All the people I know from Guatemala, etc are good, honest, hard-working, conscientious. ( and Catholic).

  17. Mightnotbeachristiantou says:

    This situation is a little different than what is normally been happening.
    The government is keeping a tight wrap on the facts.
    Many of these are not Mexicans. Many of these are children. Many of these are sick.
    Since many are coming from catholic countries, I do think the bishops need to get involved. They need to get these people medical help and send them back to their countries with help. It would mean a great cooperation with American and Latin American Bishops. This can be handled outside of American taxes with American charity.

  18. Johnno says:

    All of this is intentional.

    They WANT A CRISIS.

    A crisis then means they get to exercise draconian powers and take control of everything.

    They will use violence, famine, disease, poverty. Anything. Just so long as you know to turn to them to fix the situation they started.

    It’s Stockholm syndrome.

  19. SKAY says:

    Dienekes said-

    “Kathleen10, most of the impetus for this came from St. Teddy Kennedy in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 which completely revamped immigration preferences to favor Third World countries and “family reunification”.

    Thank you for pointing this law out–everyone seems to have forgotten that the way we did immigration was completely changed at that time — and as I remember it was to help REAL refugees from Vietnam after we pulled out of that country so suddenly and the people in South Vietnam’s(our allies in the war) lives were truly in danger because of the Communist North taking over. It probably should have only been passed as it related to just that situation perhaps with an expiration date — but it was a “Democrat” Congress and Ted Kennedy was one of their “big” thinkers–and was listened to because of his brothers. Probably good intentions–but It has turned out to be a bad law for this country. There was no thought about the future. Our welfare programs –and there are many and are continuing to expand–are a magnet.
    With the border basically open–we know it is not just “hardworking people” coming in.

  20. robtbrown says:

    This invasion is part of the plan to put pressure on Congress to pass immigration reform

  21. jflare says:

    “What to do? “When I was hungry….”
    “Whoever accepts one of these little ones…”
    reading in Fox news, these are refugees from the crime and violence of gangs in Central America, and I do not doubt these gangs exist because of USA drug consumption.”

    “Given that we have aborted a huge part of the younger generation, we ought to be happy God is sending some to us. If you can only think of the bottom line, you ought to be happy there will be someone to pay for your social security.”

    Hmm. Do I dare remind anyone that other nations’ governments have prior responsibility for these people? Do I dare remember that most of these people have little interest in contributing to America as America?
    I have a bad feeling that, as usual, anyone who remembers these inconvenient truths will be condemned for racism, bigotry, or whatever. If the President or any of the bishops had wished to arrange for humanitarian aid to millions in Central America, I think they could’ve done so without taking this step.
    Where are the bishops and leaders of Central America?

  22. Michaelus says:

    Maybe we could start by completely shutting down the DHS et al. We have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on national security and at this moment an illiterate 10 year old from Honduras can walk right into the country and disappear. The only thing actually protecting us is the fact that if the jihadboys try this route they will probably have their weapons and bombs stolen by the Mexican traffickers…

    But in reality we are ruled by an oligarchy that is going to allow this to happen without regard to the law. I suggest we get our parish priests used to offering Latin masses for everyone before they announce that the 9AM mass is Spanish.

  23. tcreek says:

    Those who hold that “we” should accept illegal immigrants appears nice until you realize that other people and not them are the “we” who will bear the burden.

  24. Magash says:

    I for one would be glad to accept almost anyone who wants to immigrate to this country. This country was built on immigration and it should be remembered that country quotas and tight borders are a product of the progressive movement of the early twentieth century and were designed to keep out Jews and Catholics from eastern Europe during the run up to WWII.
    Having said that, the only reasonable public policy is to secure the borders. Then build a giant facility along it, call it New Ellis Island, and allow in anyone who can prove they don’t have a criminal record, doesn’t have a contagious disease, and has the prospects of employment.
    But it all starts with a secure border. Until we do that real reform of the system isn’t possible. Please don’t let us wait until terrorist conduct another attack via our porous borders.

  25. CrimsonCatholic says:

    Given that we have aborted a huge part of the younger generation, we ought to be happy God is sending some to us. If you can only think of the bottom line, you ought to be happy there will be someone to pay for your social security.

    Most are not citizens and they are paid under the table, so no, they will not help the social security system. In fact, they will be more of a burden on the system, over running a health system in bad shape as it is. Plus, unemployment is already high for low skilled workers, and this is only going to harm them even more.

    All the people I know from Guatemala, etc are good, honest, hard-working, conscientious. ( and Catholic).

    No they are superstitious, and like a majority of the catholics in this country, they pick-and-chose what they believe.

  26. j says:

    Unfortunately, it is an attempt by the Obama administration to drive a truck through a humanitarian exemption which itself made sense, when reasonably applied. The Special Immigrant Juvenile Status was passed to protect children who had no relatives, and were abused and/or abandoned. This obviously (unless you call, probably with reason, handing innocent children over to smugglers for a long perilous journey just to expedite your OWN legal status abuse) is supposed to protect children, and ONLY those who have no family in the US. Since most of these kids are being sent BY family is shouldn’t apply, but the feds are orchestrating the general amnesty.

    The key is that they are immediately transferring these kids to other States. Declaring children abused and abandoned is done is State court, and it is unlikely that Judges in Texas or Arizona or New Mexico are not both aware that this is a ridiculous loophole and that your can’t declare abuse and then hand over to “abusers”, who then benefit. The rush to transfer coincides with a rush to avoid unsympathetic State courts, a check (or block) on automatic amnesty.

  27. snoozie says:

    Of course it’s orchestrated. And it would appear to all intelligent analyses that the USCCB is all on board with it….the push for illegal immigration has been VERY strong from the bishops, and intensifying over the past year.

  28. maryh says:

    @lana Absolutely right. All the Mexicans and Central and South Americans I know are also good, honest, hardworking, usually Catholic people.

    These people are natural allies of conservatives, especially conservative Catholics. They believe in and have intact families, go to church, and don’t sit around on unemployment (as I myself have done, rather than take a menial job). Many of the ones I know work two menial jobs. They put me to shame, frankly.

    Sometimes all this looks like an attempt to separate us from our natural allies. Because of the lack of border security, we’re letting violent criminals into the country, and now, with this orchestrated refugee crisis, Obama is letting in tens of thousands of children with no parents. In fact, he is separating children from their parents as a condition for getting in. How screwed up is that?

    And yes, the American and Latin American Church and Catholics (ie, us, as in you and I) should take care of the children, not the government, just as subsidiarity says should usually happen. And since we all know conservatives give more to charity than liberals, it probably will literally be the people on this list and others like us who send their money or open their homes to take care of these children.

    And of course this is all separate from the question of securing our borders (which we obviously need to do) which is related to but separate from whom we should allow to immigrate.

    I like Magesh’s idea, myself.

  29. Peggy R says:

    You know, you can’t say these things at Mark Shea’s blog.

  30. maryh says:

    @jflare “Do I dare remember that most of these people have little interest in contributing to America as America?”

    Don’t mean to single you out particularly, but where in the world are you and others getting this idea? Because they still like their country of origin? Still visit it? Because some of them, not having learned English as children, will either never speak English or will always speak it badly? Because they speak Spanish around you?

    This idea that “they refuse to learn English” seems to result from the fact that because we have a steady stream of Hispanics coming into this country, we always have a group of people who don’t speak English or don’t speak it well. Which gives the impression that “they refuse to learn English.”

  31. CrimsonCatholic says:

    @maryh

    That’s not true that Hispanics are natural allies of conservatives, 71% of Hispanics voted for Obama and this current regime we have. Also the Hispanic unemployment rate is between 8-10%, compared to the White and Asian rates of around 5%, so that claim isn’t necessarily true that Hispanics work harder or won’t sit around.

  32. maryh says:

    Yes, they voted for Obama. Which shows that Obama’s gotten our natural allies. Wonder how that happened?

    As for the Hispanic unemployment rate, how much of that includes the Hispanics being paid “under the table”?

  33. Magash says:

    As I said in my previous post I am a proponent of controlled immigration which is more liberal (in the rules not political sense) than we have now.
    I am also old enough to remember that many of the 20th Century ethnic immigrants from Europe failed to learn English or spoke it badly (or at least with very noticeable accents.) Many returned to visit the old country later in life. None as far as I know considered their lack of language skills or continued interest in the country of their birth as un-American.
    I believe that the real point here is that what is happening is the United States’ fault. Unlike in many cases when the left seeks to blame the U.S. for the actions of other bad actors this one is entirely at our feet. The refusal of this, and past administrations to secure our border. The refusal of this and past administrations to reform quota based immigration laws originally passed by anti-ethnic Progressives. The refusal of the Federal and state governments to enforce existing laws, which are admittedly bad. These all are the problem. Certainly this administration and this president have created this crisis, however it is not hard to burn down a building if those who have come before you have soaked it in fuel and left it there waiting for you to strike the match.

  34. CrimsonCatholic says:

    @maryh

    I don’t know what you mean by “natural allies”, but as a group Hispanics cannot be described as conservative as you claim. The reason amnesty is being pushed so hard by Democrats, is because they will have an endless supply of voters to keep themselves in power.

    The unemployment rate surveys are obtained by phone and personal interviews. It matters not how the person is paid, but if they are employed.

  35. maryh says:

    You are right. The Democrats are pushing amnesty because they think Hispanics will vote for them. The Democrats sure sound a lot friendlier.

    My point was that by lifestyle Hispanics subscribe to conservative values. I imagine the Democrats believe that when they’ve had enough bi-lingual education to keep them from learning English well at the anti-Catholic/anti-Christian public schools, the younger generation will fit right into their party. Letting in criminals and parentless children should help with that as well.

    Try assuming that the average Hispanic immigrant is just as interested in becoming a citizen (they’re ALREADY American) and contributing to this country as any other wave of immigrants to the US has.

  36. tcreek says:

    When are Liberals (and Catholic bishops) going to start praising the United States of America for continuing to welcome LEGAL immigrants to this country and at a much larger scale than in the past?

    Persons Obtaining LEGAL Permanent Resident Status. Sample fiscal years per Wikipedia.
    Source: US Department of Homeland Security, Office of Immigration Statistics
    1950 – 249,187
    1967 – 361,972
    1977 – 462,315
    1987 – 601,516
    1997 – 797,847
    Since 2006 – over 1,000,000 ever year

    2012 – Inflow of New LEGAL Permanent Residents.
    Americas 407,172 including 146,406 from Mexico
    Asia – 429,599 including 81,784 from China, 66,434 from India, and 57,327 from Philippines
    Africa – 107,241
    Europe – 81,671
    2012 – All Legal Immigrants – 1,031,631

    Americans have a right to be proud of the new life they have offered to 10s of millions of new CITIZENS.

  37. MarkG says:

    It’s a very difficult journey for most of these people. They have found numerous dead bodies in the border area, including children and teenagers who didn’t make it.
    These people are facing a lot of problems in their journey. The smugglers often abandon them if there is trouble, or stop part way and demand more money from the families, and often sexually abuse the women and girls.

    The local newspaper featured a story about a family whose 15 year old son died in the desert trying to cross. His mother had given him a special Rosary. His body was so decomposed they identified him by the Rosary.

    Many of the children coming are wearing Rosaries around their necks, so as Catholics, I feel we have an extra duty to help them.

  38. jflare says:

    maryh,
    Such attitudes contribute a great deal to the discord surrounding this subject matter. For starters, let’s be bothered to admit that the most intellectually and practically honest view considers citizens of different nations differently. We do not consider “American” to refer to any citizen of any nation in the Western Hemisphere, but to those persons who are citizens of the United States in particular. Next, let’s be bothered to admit that when most peoples of nations migrate to new nations, they typically are expected to learn the language of the new nation, adopting said language to no small extent. I do not think it too monstrous an expectation to think that if someone would migrate to the US, that we could expect them to speak English before very long. yet I have come across exceedingly little expectation within the Hispanic community that anyone should bother to learn the cultural ways of this nation.

    I have seen exceedingly little evidence to suggest that most of the Hispanic migrants have any interest in becoming citizens or demonstrating any care at all for what should be their new country. If anything, I see a constant attitude that anyone who dares even suggest such a thing must surely be a racist and a bigot.
    I think it very difficult for any nation to be welcoming to any newcomer when the newcomer offers the distinct attitude that the native can take his nation and rot.

  39. sunbreak says:

    First of all, we must not forget that these are illegal immigrants. The fact that they are children should not obscure that fact. We already have enough illegal immigrants in this country.
    “Many of the children coming are wearing Rosaries around their necks, so as Catholics, I feel we have an extra duty to help them.” Are you unaware that gang members often wear rosaries as a gang symbol?

  40. jhayes says:

    Interview with Cardinal O’Malley:

    The fear and hatred of foreigners is nothing new in the United States, nation of immigrants though it is. O’Malley said he’d been reading up on the Know-Nothings of the 19th century who wanted to limit severely the immigration of Catholics, require them to wait 21 years for naturalization, and allow only Protestants to teach in public schools.

    There is a reason there are few stained-glass windows in the Philadelphia cathedral, he said: “Because they knew they would be broken with bricks.” (Indeed, the building was designed during Know-Nothing violence in the 1840s with no windows at all at street level).
    In the 20th century that same sort of xenophobia was turned against immigrants from Latin America and Asia, O’Malley said, with the added factor of racism.

    Bigotry, as religious scholar Reza Aslan points out, is not the result of ignorance so much as it is of fear. Yet most of the fears directed at immigrants are unfounded. There is ample proof, for instance, that first-generation immigrants do not increase crime, they help to reduce it.
    “Obviously,” said O’Malley, the fear is “not rational, and I think we are dealing with it in an irrational way.” In his opinion, the “path to citizenship” for immigrants, which is anathema to many conservatives, is absolutely essential. “If anything, the United States should capitalize on people’s desire to become part of this country,” he said. “They become great contributors.”

    But if their children grow up seeing their parents treated as, well, as “aliens,” they will be full of resentment.

    What used to be called “the Protestant work ethic” is now better understood as an immigrant ethic, and it is not just about work. O’Malley sees it as “about the family and the common good and the values that have been eroded by our extreme individualism in this country.”

    “The reason we have 11 million undocumented workers here is because we need them,” said O’Malley.

    The cardinal clearly is frustrated with Washington, where sensible immigration bills go to die. But in the power of gestures, he sees some hope. The mass at the border is just one of many.

    “I don’t think it will make any difference to the politicians,” said O’Malley, “but to the 11 million undocumented immigrants, we need to let them know we care, and are doing something to get this fixed.”

    And, so, the fight against global indifference goes on. And the children keep coming.

    HERE

  41. Cathy says:

    Logistically speaking, our nation does not have a great track record for keeping track of and ensuring the safety and well-being of our own foster children. They are all of them human beings made in the image and likeness of God. That being said, there seems to be only one association the media is willing to admit to for them being here, poverty. A child sent here with only a Rosary, and no identification – baptismal certificate, etc., as well as men and women without any identification seem to pose a real challenge in claiming a Catholic identity or even a national identity. This entire situation begs so many questions, first among those are, who are you and how did you come to be here. Were you forced to come here, were you sold to someone, were you kidnapped, were you lured? If they are Catholic, isn’t there a way to track them to a diocese in which they were originally baptized and a capacity to confirm and contact family members. Pray for them and for our country. The entire situation is confounding, I feel a certain trepidation at their arrival, I fear for our country as well as for these poor souls.

  42. acardnal says:

    I can’t believe Cardinal O’Malley would reference Reza Aslan who wrote a horrific book about Christianity that it full of falsehoods and misconceptions.

  43. jhayes says:

    acardnal, the mention of Aslan isn’t in quotes, so those words aren’t attributed to Cardinal O’Malley

  44. jhayes says:

    jflare, wrote: “We do not consider “American” to refer to any citizen of any nation in the Western Hemisphere, but to those persons who are citizens of the United States in particular.”

    Citizens of Central and South American countries consider that they are also “Americans” and resent the attempted appropriation of the term by citizens of the United States of America.

    If you ask an officer at an American Consulate “Are you an American”, he/she will reply “I am a citizen of the United States of America” to avoid making the more general claim.

  45. jflare says:

    I think most of these comments are quite telling.

    “If you ask an officer at an American Consulate “Are you an American”, he/she will reply “I am a citizen of the United States of America” to avoid making the more general claim.”

    Yes, an officer at an American consulate will give a politically correct answer. Doing otherwise would obviously place his life and those of others in the consulate potentially in grave danger. Whether the officer actually believes in that idea is a different matter entirely.

    As for Cardinal O’Malley, this is not the first time I have ever heard him say something moderately intolerant with regard to important matters. He seems to have a tough time remembering that homosexual behavior is a sin too.

    I think if the Hispanic community–or any other–had any wish to become US citizens or join with US citizens in helping to make this nation a better one, they could certainly have made efforts to learn the language, learn the culture, learn the history of the nation, to understand why this nation is what it is. As things stand, I have seen ample effort to hold the US accountable to anyone who cares to complain about anything and proclaim that we’re evil because we aren’t perfect by someone else’s standards.

    I think it very easy to pick on the US for any number of transgressions. When it comes to being accountable to solving any problems though, I mostly hear crickets chirping. They’d much rather blast us for being less than perfect.

  46. jflare says:

    “Citizens of Central and South American countries consider that they are also “Americans” and resent the attempted appropriation of the term by citizens of the United States of America. ”

    I imagine they do. Now.
    I also have a strong suspicion that, before the immigration struggles and related problems arose, they more accurately referred to themselves as Nicaraguans, Paraguayans, Chileans, Brazilians, and others. Same way as many of us sometimes refer to ourselves as Nebraskans, Oregonians, Texans, or other states of the Union. In the last 40 years, I think it has become a matter of political correctness to attempt claiming credit for any number of things by referring to oneself as an “American”. But I think most attempts are just that.
    I think “Americans” have been known to be citizens of the US for much, much longer than that.

    Of course, it doesn’t hurt that many multiculturalists here in the US wish to see “American” watered down as much as possible. They can’t stand to see the US do something on it’s own without the rest of the world sharing the success. Oddly, they don’t mind abandoning the notion if things don’t work out. ….Although they tend to be quite willing to excoriate us for any failure as they see it.

  47. maryh says:

    @jflare “American” has at least two meanings:
    1. citizen of the US
    2. person from North, Central or South America.

    The main soccer club in the Mexico City, founded in 1916, is called Club de Fútbol América S.A. de C.V., commonly known as Club América or América. I know this because there are a lot of Mexican immigrants where I work, and some of them support that team. So when they cheer for “America”, I don’t automatically know whether they’re talking about the United States or the Mexican soccer team, especially during soccer season.

    I certainly didn’t mean to imply that all Central and South Americans, by virtue of being Americans in the second sense, were or should automatically be considered Americans in the second sense, i.e. US citizens.

  48. jhayes says:

    jflare wrote “I imagine they do. Now.”

    I first got that reaction in the 1960′s when I encountered a group of people from South America during a trip to Europe.

  49. maryh says:

    @jflare

    I would like to see evidence that Hispanic immigrants learn English at any slower rate than any other group of immigrants.

    First of all, if someone speaks without a Hispanic accent, and they don’t have a Hispanic sounding name (or you don’t know their name), you probably won’t know that they’re Hispanic at all, so you have probably met Hispanics who speak English perfectly well.

    Also, people learn languages naturally only up to about the age of 10 or 12. After that, how well they learn another language is related not just to will but teaching and ability. I might compare it to music: most people can carry a tune = most teenage or adult immigrants can eventually learn to speak passable English. Some people sing very well = some of them will speak English without an accent (the ones you can’t even tell are Hispanic, unless they want you to know). Finally, some people will never be able to carry a tune = some of them will never speak much English.

    The reason you probably get the impression that “they won’t learn English” is because, due to continuous immigration, there are always people who don’t speak English well because they’re in the process of learning it, or because they can’t. And whatever their English ability, among themselves, they tend to speak Spanish.

  50. lana says:

    i am reading now about how President Obama’s DREAM Act being the reason for this. It says minors will not be deported…. so, wanted to correct first post about some Bush law being the reason.

  51. jflare says:

    jhayes, maryh,
    1. Outside of liberal or internationalist bullying and bigotry, the term “American” has only ever referred to citizens of the United States that I know about. Most people who are not have referred to themselves as Latinos, Chicanos, Hispanics, or a nation (Mexican, Honduran, Chilean, etc…). I have never heard anyone from outside the US refer to themselves as American. If some refer to themselves as American more loosely and represent themselves as being American, I do not expect American citizens, US citizens, to take them seriously. American is another name for a nationality, not all the Americas. If a team in Mexico was founded in 1916 and calls themselves an American club, I again refer to the idea that we, as US citizens, are not obligated to agree. They are a Mexican club, whatever they wish to state otherwise.

    2. I have seen no evidence at all that incoming immigrants have any intent on becoming Americans–as I would define that term, obviously–learning English as a group, or even assimilating with American culture. When you come to this country, fly a Mexican flag, attend Mass in Spanish, and generally behave as though you might still be in Mexico or another Central American nation, I have to question your real interest in being an American citizen.

    I keep hearing that many of these people have been here for 40 years. If that’s the case, I think they’ve had ample time to learn the language.

    It does not seem to me that a nation can be justly chastised for failing at welcoming the stranger when the stranger effectively rejects the gaining nation for that long.

  52. jflare says:

    “I certainly didn’t mean to imply that all Central and South Americans, by virtue of being Americans in the second sense, were or should automatically be considered Americans in the second sense, i.e. US citizens.”

    You may not, but that is most definitely the view that has been leveled many times. For instance, that is the primary motive behind such things as “motor voter” laws that give the right to vote right along with the driver’s license. Such has been the demand on many occasions.

  53. jflare says:

    “Citizens of Central and South American countries consider that they are also “Americans” and resent the attempted appropriation of the term by citizens of the United States of America. ”

    “I first got that reaction in the 1960?s when I encountered a group of people from South America during a trip to Europe.”

    If those from Central or South American resent the notion that people from the US use the term to refer themselves exclusively, they’d best do some thinking about who has misappropriated what term. According to Wikipedia, certainly there has been considerable controversy, especially amongst Central and South American interests, or some groups in Europe. On the other hand, the term “American” has been used in an international treaty to refer to US citizens as early as 1796.

    Again, outside of those who wish to blame the US for something, I’ve never heard of anyone from Central or South America referring to themselves as American. I’ve always heard Hispanic, Latino, or something along those lines.

  54. s i says:

    “I think if the Hispanic community–or any other–had any wish to become US citizens or join with US citizens in helping to make this nation a better one, they could certainly have made efforts to learn the language, learn the culture, learn the history of the nation, to understand why this nation is what it is.” – @jflare

    There is absolutely no effort to blend in to our “melting pot” and we promote this lack of effort, offering everything in Spanish as well as English. I also see, for the most part, cafeteria catholics and Protestants.

  55. CrimsonCatholic says:

    @maryh

    I just pointed out that Hispanics as a group are not conservative. They vote Democrat, and by extension they vote for expanded abortion, gay marriage, etc and they have a high rate of bearing children out of wedlock and men not being around while raising the children. The claim you make is just not true.

    If your assumption was true about Hispanics wanting to become citizens, then wouldn’t they become citizens, instead of breaking the law and coming here illegally?