JD Vance and the USCCB

11,754 Views | 264 Replies | Last: 4 hrs ago by Quo Vadis?
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:




i mean, it looks like they really really love venezuela. why are they upset about going back to the country of the flag they're draping themselves in?

i'm the son of an immigrant and naturalized citizen and you would never see their family caught dead wearing the flag of the country they came from like that, especially in protest of the US governemnt, even though they were proud of who they were and where they came from.

shameful!


Yeah, I don't understand this. Do you want to be American or not?
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:

are you incapable or unwilling to make a yes or no answer?

it doesn't matter because a child can see what the answers are.

you don't think illegal immigration is wrong, even if you won't say so directly.

you seem to think we should be taking more, and you want this burden to be borne diffusely through public measures rather than individually by private

but the real tell is you ignore the effect of the measures to militarize the border and cut funding for illegal immigrants waiting trials. because, again, a child can see that these have a chilling effect on immigration, and not doing them is at best tacit approval and at worse actual encouragement.

have some backbone, man.
Yes or no to any question is an F16 approach in my opinion. I made it clear that one thing can be wrong in the eyes of the law of man and right in the eyes of God.

Since you favor a simple yes or no, would Jesus be in complete favor of the recent executive orders affecting immigrants?

I'll hang up and listen.

Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

Yes or no to any question is an F16 approach in my opinion. I made it clear that one thing can be wrong in the eyes of the law of man and right in the eyes of God.
i said do you think it is wrong. obviously your answer might be at odds with the law, or at odds with God. pretty sad you are so ashamed of your own opinion that you won't give it.


Quote:

Since you favor a simple yes or no, would Jesus be in complete favor of the recent executive orders affecting immigrants?
i ask you to speak to your own mind, and you in turn ask me to speak of the mind of Christ?

even so - complete favor? i doubt it. but the scriptures - inspired by the Spirit - say to obey the laws. the Lord Himself said to obey the law, even twice over. lawlessness is evil.
AGC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Wait what? Are you really that pedantic? You won't answer the question unless you get your pound of flesh first?

Money talks, eh?
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"i mean, it looks like they really really love venezuela. why are they upset about going back to the country of the flag they're draping themselves in?"

Melting pot vs. quilt. You wouldn't understand.

ETA: Interesting flag design by Stephen F Austin for Texas:
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Are we not asked to put on the mind of Christ? (1 Cor 2:16) Of course I am going to approach any and all laws that affect human life in this way. I am not sorry that bothers you.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
i'm not bothered at all.

i think it's extremely revealing that you simply refuse to state your opinion.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
i understand the idea. i think it's idiotic and self-defeating on the face of it.

aristotle has this most succinctly:
Quote:

a state is not merely the sharing of a common locality for the purpose of preventing mutual injury and exchanging goods. these are necessary preconditions of a state's existence, yet nevertheless, even if all these conditions are present, that does not therefore make a state, but a state is a partnership of families and clans in living well, and its object is a full and independent life.

at the same time this will not be realized unless the partners do inhabit one and the same locality and practice intermarriage; this indeed is the reason why family relationships have arisen throughout the states, and brotherhoods and clubs for sacrificial rites and social recreations. but such an organization is produced by the feeling of friendship, for friendship is the motive of social life; therefore while the object of a state is is the good life, these things are means to that end.

A state is the partnership of clans and villages in a full and independent life, which in our view constitutes a happy and noble life; the political fellowship must therefore be deemed to exist for the sake of noble actions, not merely for living in common.
in other words, if your state is comprised of a "quilt" of communities which are distinct and do not share a common culture, you do not have a state at all.

this is the problem with the resistance to assimilation and the retention of a distinct identity separate from the shared identity of the people of the state. it will always prevent coherence and lead to faction and ultimately political (or actual) balkanization.
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:

i understand the idea. i think it's idiotic and self-defeating on the face of it.

aristotle has this most succinctly:
Quote:

a state is not merely the sharing of a common locality for the purpose of preventing mutual injury and exchanging goods. these are necessary preconditions of a state's existence, yet nevertheless, even if all these conditions are present, that does not therefore make a state, but a state is a partnership of families and clans in living well, and its object is a full and independent life.

at the same time this will not be realized unless the partners do inhabit one and the same locality and practice intermarriage; this indeed is the reason why family relationships have arisen throughout the states, and brotherhoods and clubs for sacrificial rites and social recreations. but such an organization is produced by the feeling of friendship, for friendship is the motive of social life; therefore while the object of a state is is the good life, these things are means to that end.

A state is the partnership of clans and villages in a full and independent life, which in our view constitutes a happy and noble life; the political fellowship must therefore be deemed to exist for the sake of noble actions, not merely for living in common.
in other words, if your state is comprised of a "quilt" of communities which are distinct and do not share a common culture, you do not have a state at all.

this is the problem with the resistance to assimilation and the retention of a distinct identity separate from the shared identity of the people of the state. it will always prevent coherence and lead to faction and ultimately political (or actual) balkanization.



It's akin to the development of doctrine.
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What you have in the example I provided from SFA is his connection to England and Mexico. He wrote about the very thing. In his own way, he was making a statement about where he and others were coming from and where they were hoping to go, the new Republic of Texas.

The people who are waving flags from where they came are not doing so because the want to change this place to their former country, but to show a sense of pride of where they came from and the hope they want to achieve namely- citizens of this country. That is why they sold everything they had to come here. You are not giving them credit for that and are just hung up on a flag or dialect.

Assimilation is more easily understood top down, but not so bottom up. Ask as many people of color if the American Dream became their reality and you will likely get a mix of responses. What you are saying is that the more you stop being you and more like me- the better it will be for you. That is just not the case. Again, I don't think that unless you have gone through this- it doesn't make sense. Hence the quote from 350 BC. That is the melting pot example.

A quilt is a better example because it celebrates each of us and that we are bound into a single tapestry that is the United States of America. We don't have to give up who we are, our ancestral language, cuisine, traditions, etc. All these make us better as a nation of immigrants. New immigrants knows full well that they need to learn the language of the land to get ahead. But what is wrong with speaking two or more languages?

You say that the retention of their identity prevents coherence, but I don't see that at all. As someone who speaks, writes, and reads in two languages- I feel more connected than ever. As a 5th generation Texan, I don't have the nearness of a connection to a country like England or Mexico that Stephen F Austin had- I only fly the flag of the United States at my house.

I am not offended by those colors, because I understand where they are coming from and what they hope to achieve. Wish more people did.

Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think you need to look up non sequitur. Or filibuster.
AGC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:

I think you need to look up non sequitur. Or filibuster.


I think of america as a soccer team winning 2-0, where the visiting fans take off their Mexican jersey to reveal an American one underneath, because they were secretly cheering for the US all along! We're a stronger nation because of it. Jesus would be proud of selling two jerseys to every fan! It makes our nation richer!
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:

i'm not bothered at all.

i think it's extremely revealing that you simply refuse to state your opinion.


Yeah that's his schtik

I've tried many times

He refuses
NonReg85
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It leads to blood...Every single time.
TPS_Report
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

Let the parsing of the Word of God begin...



I bleed Maroon and I wipe burnt orange!
AGC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TPS_Report said:

Quote:

"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

Let the parsing of the Word of God begin...


Quote mining is fun.

Leviticus said:


"This is to be a lasting ordinance for you: On the tenth day of the seventh month you must deny yourselves and not do any workwhether native-born or a foreigner residing among you…"

"Say to them: 'Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who offers a burnt offering or sacrifice…"

"'I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people.…"

"Therefore I say to the Israelites, "None of you may eat blood, nor may any foreigner residing among you eat blood. Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among you who hunts any animal or bird that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth,"

" Anyone, whether native-born or foreigner, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then they will be clean."

"But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the foreigners residing among you must not do any of these detestable things, for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled."

"Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him."

" anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death."

"You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born. I am the Lord your God.'"


Tell me more about these clearly law abiding citizens.

Edit: forgot to add, I look forward to stoning the local curanderas!
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Captain Pablo said:

Zobel said:

i'm not bothered at all.

i think it's extremely revealing that you simply refuse to state your opinion.


Yeah that's his schtik

I've tried many times

He refuses



… and yet most of you know exactly where I stand. Go figure!
TPS_Report
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AGC said:

TPS_Report said:

Quote:

"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

Let the parsing of the Word of God begin...


Quote mining is fun.

Leviticus said:


"This is to be a lasting ordinance for you: On the tenth day of the seventh month you must deny yourselves and not do any workwhether native-born or a foreigner residing among you…"

"Say to them: 'Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who offers a burnt offering or sacrifice…"

"'I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people.…"

"Therefore I say to the Israelites, "None of you may eat blood, nor may any foreigner residing among you eat blood. Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among you who hunts any animal or bird that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth,"

" Anyone, whether native-born or foreigner, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then they will be clean."

"But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the foreigners residing among you must not do any of these detestable things, for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled."

"Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him."

" anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death."

"You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born. I am the Lord your God.'"


Tell me more about these clearly law abiding citizens.

Edit: forgot to add, I look forward to stoning the local curanderas!

Are you reading this to say that since the immigrant broke the law by entering this country God's requirement to treat the foreigner as a citizen no longer applies?

Are you reading this to say that immigrants can be treated differently only if they break one of God's laws, like sacrificing a child to Molek?

Are you reading this to say our laws cannot treat foreigners and citizens differently (which is the plain language standard)?

Please clarify.



I bleed Maroon and I wipe burnt orange!
AGC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TPS_Report said:

AGC said:

TPS_Report said:

Quote:

"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

Let the parsing of the Word of God begin...


Quote mining is fun.

Leviticus said:


"This is to be a lasting ordinance for you: On the tenth day of the seventh month you must deny yourselves and not do any workwhether native-born or a foreigner residing among you…"

"Say to them: 'Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who offers a burnt offering or sacrifice…"

"'I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people.…"

"Therefore I say to the Israelites, "None of you may eat blood, nor may any foreigner residing among you eat blood. Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among you who hunts any animal or bird that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth,"

" Anyone, whether native-born or foreigner, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then they will be clean."

"But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the foreigners residing among you must not do any of these detestable things, for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled."

"Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him."

" anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death."

"You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born. I am the Lord your God.'"


Tell me more about these clearly law abiding citizens.

Edit: forgot to add, I look forward to stoning the local curanderas!

Are you reading this to say that since the immigrant broke the law by entering this country God's requirement to treat the foreigner as a citizen no longer applies?

Are you reading this to say that immigrants can be treated differently only if they break one of God's laws, like sacrificing a child to Molek?

Are you reading this to say our laws cannot treat foreigners and citizens differently (which is the plain language standard)?

Please clarify.



Bit of a catch 22 isn't it! You gotta break the law to obey it. It's almost like quoting Leviticus (which demands obeying the law and conforming to local custom) winds up being a really bad comparison.

Still curious though, will you help me stone the curanderas?
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

God's requirement to treat the foreigner as a citizen
that's not a thing.
TPS_Report
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:


Quote:

God's requirement to treat the foreigner as a citizen
that's not a thing.


"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

Please explain how it isn't a thing in light of the Word of God instructing his followers to treat foreigners as native-born.



I bleed Maroon and I wipe burnt orange!
PeekingDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It is interesting that in every discussion about what a nation should or should not do with immigrants, that the assumption seems to be that their country of origin and its people are not salvageable.
TPS_Report
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AGC said:

TPS_Report said:

AGC said:

TPS_Report said:

Quote:

"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

Let the parsing of the Word of God begin...


Quote mining is fun.

Leviticus said:


"This is to be a lasting ordinance for you: On the tenth day of the seventh month you must deny yourselves and not do any workwhether native-born or a foreigner residing among you…"

"Say to them: 'Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who offers a burnt offering or sacrifice…"

"'I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people.…"

"Therefore I say to the Israelites, "None of you may eat blood, nor may any foreigner residing among you eat blood. Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among you who hunts any animal or bird that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth,"

" Anyone, whether native-born or foreigner, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then they will be clean."

"But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the foreigners residing among you must not do any of these detestable things, for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled."

"Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him."

" anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death."

"You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born. I am the Lord your God.'"


Tell me more about these clearly law abiding citizens.

Edit: forgot to add, I look forward to stoning the local curanderas!

Are you reading this to say that since the immigrant broke the law by entering this country God's requirement to treat the foreigner as a citizen no longer applies?

Are you reading this to say that immigrants can be treated differently only if they break one of God's laws, like sacrificing a child to Molek?

Are you reading this to say our laws cannot treat foreigners and citizens differently (which is the plain language standard)?

Please clarify.



Bit of a catch 22 isn't it! You gotta break the law to obey it. It's almost like quoting Leviticus (which demands obeying the law and conforming to local custom) winds up being a really bad comparison.

Still curious though, will you help me stone the curanderas?

I have zero desire to harm someone for practicing their religion (as long as it isn't being practiced on me). As a believer in the importance of the 1st Amendment doing so would be un-American.



I bleed Maroon and I wipe burnt orange!
AGC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TPS_Report said:

Zobel said:


Quote:

God's requirement to treat the foreigner as a citizen
that's not a thing.


"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

Please explain how it isn't a thing in light of the Word of God instructing his followers to treat foreigners as native-born.


The rest of Leviticus says foreigners living among you they have to live like you. Not that they're magically the same thing because of one verse. We gonna make a case that's happening? These people all paying taxes? Buying auto insurance? Respecting immigration law? The best way to avoid bad arguments is not to make them.
AGC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TPS_Report said:

AGC said:

TPS_Report said:

AGC said:

TPS_Report said:

Quote:

"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

Let the parsing of the Word of God begin...


Quote mining is fun.

Leviticus said:


"This is to be a lasting ordinance for you: On the tenth day of the seventh month you must deny yourselves and not do any workwhether native-born or a foreigner residing among you…"

"Say to them: 'Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who offers a burnt offering or sacrifice…"

"'I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people.…"

"Therefore I say to the Israelites, "None of you may eat blood, nor may any foreigner residing among you eat blood. Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among you who hunts any animal or bird that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth,"

" Anyone, whether native-born or foreigner, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then they will be clean."

"But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the foreigners residing among you must not do any of these detestable things, for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled."

"Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him."

" anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death."

"You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born. I am the Lord your God.'"


Tell me more about these clearly law abiding citizens.

Edit: forgot to add, I look forward to stoning the local curanderas!

Are you reading this to say that since the immigrant broke the law by entering this country God's requirement to treat the foreigner as a citizen no longer applies?

Are you reading this to say that immigrants can be treated differently only if they break one of God's laws, like sacrificing a child to Molek?

Are you reading this to say our laws cannot treat foreigners and citizens differently (which is the plain language standard)?

Please clarify.



Bit of a catch 22 isn't it! You gotta break the law to obey it. It's almost like quoting Leviticus (which demands obeying the law and conforming to local custom) winds up being a really bad comparison.

Still curious though, will you help me stone the curanderas?

I have zero desire to harm someone for practicing their religion (as long as it isn't being practiced on me). As a believer in the importance of the 1st Amendment doing so would be un-American.


But what about levitical law?
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
treating someone as a native doesn't mean they're citizens.

for one thing, the modern concept of citizen doesn't map directly to bronze age culture.

for another, foreigners were treated differently by the Torah itself. they could not do certain things, they could not participate in the passover.

"treat them the same as the native born" doesn't mean "all people are the same and there is no distinction between native and foreigner". it can't, because those distinctions are made in the same text.

hope that helps.
TPS_Report
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:

treating someone as a native doesn't mean they're citizens.
It says they should be treated as native-born. Very clearly states they are not citizens but should be treated as such.

Quote:

for one thing, the modern concept of citizen doesn't map directly to bronze age culture.
Parse parse parse. The plain text says treat them as native-born... i.e. someone born into your group.

Quote:

for another, foreigners were treated differently by the Torah itself. they could not do certain things, they could not participate in the passover.

The restrictions in the Torah are set by God. The same God who instructs his followers to treat them as native-born. So, unless God instructs otherwise (as with the Passover ceremonies) his followers are to treat foreigners as native-born. Should the foreigner sacrifice his child to Molek, he is to receive the same punishment as would a native-born who committed that offense... i.e. treated the same. By your logic, since God set restrictions on who can participate in worship, his followers can ignore the requirement to treat them as native-born.

Quote:

"treat them the same as the native born" doesn't mean "all people are the same and there is no distinction between native and foreigner". it can't, because those distinctions are made in the same text.

hope that helps.

Agreed, it does not say all people are the same and there is no distinction between native and foreigner... nor have I claimed such.



I bleed Maroon and I wipe burnt orange!
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

Very clearly states they are not citizens but should be treated as such.
no, it doesn't. ancient hebrew may not have a word for "citizen" but greek sure does, and it isn't used here. it says that strangers (i.e., foreigners or aliens) must be treated the same as native born people.

what does that mean? how about we look to the verse immediately preceding it? remember the original text had no punctuation or verses anyway.
Quote:

When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not afflict them. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.
this isn't about citizenship, it is about justice and not oppressing people. how do i know? because that is literally what it says. this isn't about parsing, this is about not making things up for the sake of a political argument.

and this isn't by far the only place this idea is put forward in the torah or the old testament as a whole. here are a handful of verses that talks about foreigners.
Quote:

If a foreigner resides with you and wants to celebrate the LORD's Passover, all the males in the household must be circumcised; then he may come near to celebrate it, and he shall be like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised man may eat of it. The same law shall apply to both the native and the foreigner who resides among you.

For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who is not partial and takes no bribe. He executes justice for the fatherless and the widow, and loves the foreigner, giving him food and clothing.

The LORD watches over the foreigners; he upholds the widow and the fatherless, but the way of the wicked he brings to ruin.

Thus says the LORD: Do justice and righteousness, and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed. And do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless, and the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place.

Thus says the LORD of hosts, Render true judgments, show kindness and mercy to one another, do not oppress the widow, the fatherless, the foreigner, or the poor, and let none of you devise evil against another in your heart.

I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, against the adulterers, against those who swear falsely, against those who oppress the hired worker in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, against those who thrust aside the foreigner, and do not fear me, says the LORD of hosts.

The sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death. Whoever takes a human life shall surely be put to death. Whoever takes an animal's life shall make it good, life for life. If anyone injures his neighbor, as he has done it shall be done to him, fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; whatever injury he has given a person shall be given to him. Whoever kills an animal shall make it good, and whoever kills a person shall be put to death. You shall have the same rule for the sojourner and for the native, for I am the Lord your God.

And if a foreigner lives among you and would keep the Passover to the LORD, according to the statute of the Passover and according to its rule, so shall he do. You shall have one statute, both for the foreigner and for the native.

If a foreigner is sojourning with you, or anyone is living permanently among you, and he wishes to offer a food offering, with a pleasing aroma to the Lord, he shall do as you do. For the assembly, there shall be one statute for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you, a statute forever throughout your generations. You and the sojourner shall be alike before the Lord. One law and one rule shall be for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you.
So what does it mean?

There is one torah, one way of life given to the Israelites. And this Torah has commandments, some to the sons of Israel, some to everyone. There is no partiality to be shown to Israelites over foreigners. The Israelites are not to have one standard for themselves, and one standard for foreigners. They are not to oppress foreigners, but are to treat them as they would treat each other. They are not to mistreat them or afflict them or enslave them. The foreigners can celebrate with them, even make offerings, but they do not become part of Israel unless they decide to be circumcised.

In other words, the "plain text" says that "citizenship" (if there were such an idea) is contingent on being a part of Israel, i.e., being circumcised, and is the exact distinction made in the Torah. As long as person is not part of Israel, they are a foreigner. They may live in the land. They may offer some sacrifices. They must not be mistreated or given a second standard of justice. But they are still foreigners.

Even so, citizen is not in view here, because a citizen is a member of the body politic - a person who has the right to participate in the administration of the state. The foreigner has no such right, and the Torah upholds this.

Quote:

Very clearly states they are not citizens but should be treated as such.

No, they are to be treated as foreigners, but shown the same love and justice as one would show to the native.

If you're arguing that people should be shown kindness, love, mercy - I don't think anyone will disagree with you.

If you're arguing that the scriptures mean we have to support certain legal approaches, you'll need to show your work beyond one random scripture pulled out of context and then paraphrased into different words (ie citizen).

Again, hope that helps.
TPS_Report
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

No, they are to be treated as foreigners, but shown the same love and justice as one would show to the native.

"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

Apparently the phrase "must be treated as native-born" actually means "be treated as foreigners"... but lovingly.

Quote:

If you're arguing that people should be shown kindness, love, mercy - I don't think anyone will disagree with you.

Well, we have one poster looking forward to stoning curanderas. I hope it was in jest, but I'm not completely sure.

Mercy is showing compassion and forgiveness when punishment is warranted. Pretty sure most people on this site want to punish immigrants for being in this country illegally rather than show mercy. If you don't believe me on that feel free to poll the board.

Quote:

If you're arguing that the scriptures mean we have to support certain legal approaches, you'll need to show your work beyond one random scripture pulled out of context and then paraphrased into different words (ie citizen).

Again, hope that helps.

The text means exactly what it says. Foreigners are to be treated as native-born. Somehow, you believe it means foreigners are to be treated differently but not cruelly.



I bleed Maroon and I wipe burnt orange!
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The scriptures are clear that there are ways that foreigners are to be treated the same, and ways that they are to be treated differently. If we took just your scripture at plain face reading the way you're asking, we could not be justified in them not being allowed to eat the Passover. And yet the same injunction - "one law among you" - is used to support that distinction.

The problem is that you are not quoting the whole thing.

"When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not afflict them. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself."

In other words, the way you shall treat them as the native among you is by:
Loving them as yourself
Not afflicting them or mistreating them for being a foreigner.

This says nothing about treating them "like a citizen". There are other ways where they are treated as foreigners. They can't eat the Passover. They are not Israelites. They couldn't own land. They are, in fact, foreigners.

You're trying to make an argument for expansive generality for one phrase but ignoring the specificity of the immediate context offered to you. I'm arguing for the broader universal that is reiterated over and over in the scripture, which is in line with and affirms the specific you're talking about.

And the whole thing I objected to in the first place was that they're not treated like citizens, because they're not. Citizens are those who participate in the government. That's the whole reason they need provision for protection.

The closest thing this comes to in the US political sense is "equal protection under the law". Which I see no one advocating against.

Quote:

Mercy is showing compassion and forgiveness when punishment is warranted. Pretty sure most people on this site want to punish immigrants for being in this country illegally rather than show mercy. If you don't believe me on that feel free to poll the board.

Yet the scriptures say one law for the foreigner and the native, both for the good and the bad!

We punish citizens for civil and criminal offenses all the time.

Over against the scriptures you're appealing to, you're actually suggesting the inverse of the wrong that the scripture aims to prevent. You appear to be advocating g for special treatment to foreigners who manifestly broken the law, in a criminal sense if they have entered illegally. Why should they get that protection?

Whatever specific US policy you are supporting - do it. And then we can see whether or not scripture affirms that.
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TPS_Report said:

Quote:

No, they are to be treated as foreigners, but shown the same love and justice as one would show to the native.

"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

Apparently the phrase "must be treated as native-born" actually means "be treated as foreigners"... but lovingly.

Quote:

If you're arguing that people should be shown kindness, love, mercy - I don't think anyone will disagree with you.

Well, we have one poster looking forward to stoning curanderas. I hope it was in jest, but I'm not completely sure.

Mercy is showing compassion and forgiveness when punishment is warranted. Pretty sure most people on this site want to punish immigrants for being in this country illegally rather than show mercy. If you don't believe me on that feel free to poll the board.

Quote:

If you're arguing that the scriptures mean we have to support certain legal approaches, you'll need to show your work beyond one random scripture pulled out of context and then paraphrased into different words (ie citizen).

Again, hope that helps.

The text means exactly what it says. Foreigners are to be treated as native-born. Somehow, you believe it means foreigners are to be treated differently but not cruelly.



I assume you consider a free ride or flight home as "punishment"
BluHorseShu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Thaddeus73 said:

I'm with Vance on this...

https://catholicherald.co.uk/jd-vances-words-on-immigration-were-a-dog-whistle-to-the-professional-catholic-class/
I agree with his stance on this....However, his comments of late really make me question his 1) motives and 2) his understanding of scripture. Stating that the Catholic church is upset about foreign cuts because they care more about getting the money and aren't truly concerned about helping people is just ridiculous. His attack on the Church for political gain (to look good in king Trump's eyes) is not lost on the rest of us. At the very least, he could have just pointed to the importance of the policy change of foreign aid without editorializing what he thinks the church's 'real' motives are in being against the deletion of all foreign aid.
So in short....I don't give much of what JD Vance says any credence or respect...even if there is a few points I might agree with. But maybe he's just practicing his interpretation of scripture where it teaches to love your boss first, and then your family and then others in the world....just not everyone at once.
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BluHorseShu said:

Thaddeus73 said:

I'm with Vance on this...

https://catholicherald.co.uk/jd-vances-words-on-immigration-were-a-dog-whistle-to-the-professional-catholic-class/
I agree with his stance on this....However, his comments of late really make me question his 1) motives and 2) his understanding of scripture. Stating that the Catholic church is upset about foreign cuts because they care more about getting the money and aren't truly concerned about helping people is just ridiculous. His attack on the Church for political gain (to look good in king Trump's eyes) is not lost on the rest of us. At the very least, he could have just pointed to the importance of the policy change of foreign aid without editorializing what he thinks the church's 'real' motives are in being against the deletion of all foreign aid.
So in short....I don't give much of what JD Vance says any credence or respect...even if there is a few points I might agree with. But maybe he's just practicing his interpretation of scripture where it teaches to love your boss first, and then your family and then others in the world....just not everyone at once.


"king Trump"

And there it is

Your concerned moderateness is noted
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BluHorseShu said:

Thaddeus73 said:

I'm with Vance on this...

https://catholicherald.co.uk/jd-vances-words-on-immigration-were-a-dog-whistle-to-the-professional-catholic-class/
I agree with his stance on this....However, his comments of late really make me question his 1) motives and 2) his understanding of scripture. Stating that the Catholic church is upset about foreign cuts because they care more about getting the money and aren't truly concerned about helping people is just ridiculous. His attack on the Church for political gain (to look good in king Trump's eyes) is not lost on the rest of us. At the very least, he could have just pointed to the importance of the policy change of foreign aid without editorializing what he thinks the church's 'real' motives are in being against the deletion of all foreign aid.
So in short....I don't give much of what JD Vance says any credence or respect...even if there is a few points I might agree with. But maybe he's just practicing his interpretation of scripture where it teaches to love your boss first, and then your family and then others in the world....just not everyone at once.


I don't know if your take is right or wrong, but let's not be naive about our church and its prelates. This is the same bunch who facilitated and tried to hide some very heinous crimes against the dignity of humans.
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

BluHorseShu said:

Thaddeus73 said:

I'm with Vance on this...

https://catholicherald.co.uk/jd-vances-words-on-immigration-were-a-dog-whistle-to-the-professional-catholic-class/
I agree with his stance on this....However, his comments of late really make me question his 1) motives and 2) his understanding of scripture. Stating that the Catholic church is upset about foreign cuts because they care more about getting the money and aren't truly concerned about helping people is just ridiculous. His attack on the Church for political gain (to look good in king Trump's eyes) is not lost on the rest of us. At the very least, he could have just pointed to the importance of the policy change of foreign aid without editorializing what he thinks the church's 'real' motives are in being against the deletion of all foreign aid.
So in short....I don't give much of what JD Vance says any credence or respect...even if there is a few points I might agree with. But maybe he's just practicing his interpretation of scripture where it teaches to love your boss first, and then your family and then others in the world....just not everyone at once.

I don't know if your take is right or wrong, but let's not be naive about our church and its prelates. This is the same bunch who facilitated and tried to hide some very heinous crimes against the dignity of humans.
Methinks that the US episcopacy has gotten used to a certain level of income and outlay financially, even if the allegations of profiting are false (likely). It's laudable to try and do the corporal works of mercy, but they should be leading to the spiritual works of mercy. I have not heard a homily on the latter in ages, yet the former is all in vogue. Yet, when we are faced with a society (even internationally) that obviously doesn't know Christ, I'm skeptical of the admonitions. Does Salus Animarum Suprema Lex mean anything to Catholics anymore?

And lololol at "King Trump".
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.