JD Vance and the USCCB

11,898 Views | 267 Replies | Last: 1 hr ago by 747Ag
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 747Ag • 7:29p, 2/11/25
AG
747Ag said:
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".


Here's another thing to consider. More than 271,000 immigrants were deported from the US over the last fiscal year, according to ICE in December.

That was under Biden, in case the Pope wondered.

Eagerly awaiting to see the messages of concern Francis sent Biden on the subject, along with the Pope's admonitions on Biden's overt promotion of murdering unborn children and sodomy and child mutilation, all of which seem like offenses to human dignity to me.
Reply Quote
7
1 edit
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 747Ag • 8:45a, 2/12/25
AG
"Merhinks"

Reply Quote
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FTACo88-FDT24dad • 8:47a, 2/12/25
AG
Do you even know how Catholic Charities work?
Reply Quote
747Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 9:16a, 2/12/25
AG
PabloSerna said:
"Merhinks"

ya guey
Reply Quote
1
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 9:21a, 2/12/25
AG
PabloSerna said:
Do you even know how Catholic Charities work?
That seems like an uncharitable response.

What does that have to do with my comment?
Reply Quote
1
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FTACo88-FDT24dad • 9:41a, 2/12/25
AG
How many of the 271k had temporary protected status?
Reply Quote
1 edit
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 9:52a, 2/12/25
AG
PabloSerna said:
How many of the 271k had temporary protected status?
I have no idea. Do you? How many of the people Trump has deported so far had protected status?

If they have actual, true protected status, that means they tried to enter through a port of entry and did it the right way and formally claimed protected status. If they do that, I suspect they won't be deported because the law actually protects them. If they did otherwise, they are here illegally and should be deported. Period. That's not an affront to human dignity. It's enforcement of a perfectly just law.

Do you think there is such a thing as a just immigration law?

But, back to my point, maybe you can go and dredge up all the Pope's statements admonitioning Biden for murdering babies, promoting sodomy and mutilation of children with surgeries intended to violate their human dignity as being male and female, and made in the image and likeness of God?

Also, while you're researching that, go ahead and send me the articles that show how many immigrants seeking protected status the Vatican has taken in and are currently allowing to live behind their walls.
Reply Quote
3
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FTACo88-FDT24dad • 10:03a, 2/12/25
AG
You're not alone. This is why the bishops put out that notice in response to JD Vance's comments. Worth reading.
Reply Quote
1 edit
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 10:19a, 2/12/25
AG
PabloSerna said:
You're not alone. This is why the bishops put out that notice in response to JD Vance's comments. Worth reading.
It's obvious that you and I have a very different world view and that's fine. I respect your right to have a different world view.

I don't want us be unnecessarily cruel to anyone, especially families so I wouldn't separate them but if that means they all leave together, then so be it. We can humanely send illegal immigrants back where they came from before they broke our immigration laws.

The real blame for this situation lies at the feet of the feckless politicians from both parties who have looked the other way in the interest of helping out their business friends who use illegal labor or the Democrat politicians, particularly over the last 4 years, who actively encourage people to migrate here and violate our immigration laws with the intent of creating a new perpetual serf class of voters for their party. Yes, I believe that is exactly what Biden et al were doing.

Where is the Pope's and the USCCB's outrage for the corruption in the countries of origin for these illegal immigrants? Why are they not admonishing them to love their fellow countrymen so they aren't compelled to leave friends and family behind?

I know you don't like to directly answer questions, preferring to obfuscate and avoid, but I will try this anyway: do you think people living in other countries have a fundamental right to the largesse of the American taxpayer?
Reply Quote
6
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FTACo88-FDT24dad • 10:33a, 2/12/25
AG
I have to step into a meeting and will respond later today. However, here is that statement that I referenced.:

WASHINGTON The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued the following statement on its long-time partnership with the federal government to serve refugees:

"Faithful to the teaching of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church has a long history of serving refugees. In 1980, the bishops of the United States began partnering with the federal government to carry out this service when Congress created the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP). Every person resettled through USRAP is vetted and approved for the program by the federal government while outside of the United States. In our agreements with the government, the USCCB receives funds to do this work; however, these funds are not sufficient to cover the entire cost of these programs. Nonetheless, this remains a work of mercy and ministry of the Church."
Reply Quote
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 10:59a, 2/12/25
AG
PabloSerna said:
I have to step into a meeting and will respond later today. However, here is that statement that I referenced.:

WASHINGTON The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued the following statement on its long-time partnership with the federal government to serve refugees:

"Faithful to the teaching of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church has a long history of serving refugees. In 1980, the bishops of the United States began partnering with the federal government to carry out this service when Congress created the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP). Every person resettled through USRAP is vetted and approved for the program by the federal government while outside of the United States. In our agreements with the government, the USCCB receives funds to do this work; however, these funds are not sufficient to cover the entire cost of these programs. Nonetheless, this remains a work of mercy and ministry of the Church."


I don't question the veracity of that statement but I fail to see how it's relevant to whether illegal immigants shouldn't be sent back from whence they came.

A little more context:
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/biden-immigration-policies-were-boon-catholic-charities-which-raked

Reply Quote
2
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FTACo88-FDT24dad • 12:49p, 2/12/25
AG
Maybe it's just my technical mind, but they're not illegal if they have been vetted and approved by the United States
Reply Quote
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 3:27p, 2/12/25
AG
PabloSerna said:
Maybe it's just my technical mind, but they're not illegal if they have been vetted and approved by the United States


I think it is fair to say that if they have sought asylum in the proper way and through the proper process then they should not be considered illegal. I am a lawyer, although not an immigration, and that makes sense to me.


Here's another missive on what started all of this:

https://www.wordonfire.org/articles/first-love-locally-jd-vance-and-ordo-amoris/
Reply Quote
BluHorseShu
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FTACo88-FDT24dad • 4:33p, 2/12/25
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.
I don't argue that. My point was only that to have an immediate response that the Church's first motivation is greed is not remotely necessary. Because if you're going to make accusations every time (and only) when the Church says something that seems to challenge an administration policy, then its not substantive and looks bad
Reply Quote
1
BluHorseShu
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Captain Pablo • 4:42p, 2/12/25
AG
Captain Pablo 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.


"king Trump"

And there it is

Your concerned moderateness is noted
Please, enlighten me... name one thing I've said here or anywhere that makes me 'moderate' other than not bending a knee to everything and anything Trump does? If you can't, then I would assume you at least have the integrity to admit you can't. Nice personal attack...on the religion board. Seems you are unable to reply with anything substantive even if you disagree.

It just proves my point when someone's first response to anything they deem attacks the politician they love is to just call them a liberal or moderate without discussing the topic. To believe I have to have implicit trust and fealty for a politician simply because I am conservative and voted for them is completely ridiculous and this is particularly true when they are misquoting scripture or theology.
Reply Quote
1
BluHorseShu
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 747Ag • 4:48p, 2/12/25
AG
747Ag said:
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".
I should have said 'President Musk'. And regarding Salus Animarum Suprema Lex, I think its important to note you don't just do this on Sundays. You do this by engaging people where they are and not waiting for them to come to you. And if people are worried about shelter and their next meal, where do you think there mind is at? I don't doubt there are individuals who have become too comfortable within the Church, but to call out the Church as a whole seems a bit much. If we start siding with our politicians against Christs Church, we are in deep trouble. We can be vigilant without being disrespectful.
Reply Quote
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BluHorseShu • 8:22p, 2/12/25
AG
BluHorseShu said:
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.
I don't argue that. My point was only that to have an immediate response that the Church's first motivation is greed is not remotely necessary. Because if you're going to make accusations every time (and only) when the Church says something that seems to challenge an administration policy, then its not substantive and looks bad


Fair
Reply Quote
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FTACo88-FDT24dad • 10:37p, 2/12/25
AG
Your question is related to one St. Thomas Aquinas covers in the Summa (Question 31, Beneficence). Particularly article 3, on the order of this charity.

It may surprise you and JD Vance that Aquinas places a qualifier that in my opinion changes the order:

"And yet this may vary according to the various requirements of time, place, or matter in hand: because in certain cases one ought, for instance, to succor a stranger, in extreme necessity, rather than one's own father, if he is not in such urgent need."

So it comes down to circumstances. We are in a better position given our wealth and prosperity to do more. God blessed us so that we can be good stewards of his gifts for the benefit of others.
Reply Quote
2 edits
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 6:27a, 2/13/25
AG
PabloSerna said:
Your question is related to one St. Thomas Aquinas covers in the Summa (Question 31, Beneficence). Particularly article 3, on the order of this charity.

It may surprise you and JD Vance that Aquinas places a qualifier that in my opinion changes the order:

"And yet this may vary according to the various requirements of time, place, or matter in hand: because in certain cases one ought, for instance, to succor a stranger, in extreme necessity, rather than one's own father, if he is not in such urgent need."

So it comes down to circumstances. We are in a better position given our wealth and prosperity to do more. God blessed us so that we can be good stewards of his gifts for the benefit of others.


That's all fine but there is clearly a prudential element to that analysis and what you think is appropriate can easily differ from what I think is appropriate for perfectly legitimate reasons. The American people elected someone who promised a certain approach to border security. That's what we are getting. This administration, unlike the previous 4 or five administrations, takes border security seriously and has prudentially determined that the first thing we must do is have a secure border and enforce our immigration laws, laws that are already on the books. Once the border is secure then there can be a discussion about dealing with immigrants who are here in violation of US law but might have circumstances that merit special treatment. The government has an obligation to protect the common good of its citizens.

But I see once again that you didn't really answer my question. Your refusal to directly answer sends the message that you know your position is wrong but you don't want to own it. Why not just admit that you believe a poor person sitting in Costa Rica has a right to the largesse of the USA?

Reply Quote
7
2 edits
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 7:08a, 2/13/25
AG
The question of proximity and urgency wasn't what was asked.
Reply Quote
3
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Zobel • 12:20p, 2/13/25
AG
Zobel said:
The question of proximity and urgency wasn't what was asked.


It may have not been asked, but I affirm (along with Aquinas) that this is precisely what determines our approach to those less fortunate or in danger that need our response.

What that response looks like, I agree will differ from one administration to another.
Reply Quote
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FTACo88-FDT24dad • 12:22p, 2/13/25
AG
It was answered and for the record, I happen to believe that is how Jesus would approach the situation.
Reply Quote
AGC
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 12:25p, 2/13/25
AG
PabloSerna said:
Zobel said:
The question of proximity and urgency wasn't what was asked.


It may have not been asked, but I affirm (along with Aquinas) that this is precisely what determines our approach to those less fortunate or in danger that need our response.

What that response looks like, I agree will differ from one administration to another.


Would aquinas affirm stepping over the homeless, the drug addicted, the suicidal domestically in this same way?
Reply Quote
1
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 12:32p, 2/13/25
AG
The question was not about us or our response. It also wasn't about our response at all collective government level.

It was about the rights of the needy. You are ignoring the question.
Reply Quote
2
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 12:41p, 2/13/25
AG
PabloSerna said:
It was answered and for the record, I happen to believe that is how Jesus would approach the situation.


I interpret this as saying you stand for the proposition that someone in another country has a RIGHT to the public wealth of the USA.
Reply Quote
6
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Zobel • 12:48p, 2/13/25
AG
Not at all. It is interconnected and not in a silo. So I have already said that we must act in accord to the gifts that each of us have. For some that will be more than others.

The question was asked if I think, "people living in other countries have a fundamental right to the largesse of the American taxpayer?"

I affirm that it depends on the circumstance. In the case of refugees fleeing a war, certain death, as such- they do.

We owe them a share in the gifts that God has blessed us with.
Reply Quote
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FTACo88-FDT24dad • 12:49p, 2/13/25
AG
Don't you affirm that all you have comes from God?
Reply Quote
1 edit
PabloSerna
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:52p, 2/13/25
AG
Pope has said as much and more. If you are a Roman Catholic - he speaks of a rightly formed conscious that should be able to see the human dignity at stake. Take note.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 1:26p, 2/13/25
AG
You think they have the right to make a claim on the US government itself? Specifically not individual US citizens, but the government?
Reply Quote
4
RAB91
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 3:01p, 2/13/25
PabloSerna said:
Not at all. It is interconnected and not in a silo. So I have already said that we must act in accord to the gifts that each of us have. For some that will be more than others.

The question was asked if I think, "people living in other countries have a fundamental right to the largesse of the American taxpayer?"

I affirm that it depends on the circumstance. In the case of refugees fleeing a war, certain death, as such- they do.

We owe them a share in the gifts that God has blessed us with.
That's why you can donate to any PRIVATE charity that you think addresses this.

However, our government (that is funded by our tax dollars) doesn't owe them anything.
Reply Quote
7
1 edit
lobopride
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 3:52p, 2/13/25
PabloSerna said:
Not at all. It is interconnected and not in a silo. So I have already said that we must act in accord to the gifts that each of us have. For some that will be more than others.

The question was asked if I think, "people living in other countries have a fundamental right to the largesse of the American taxpayer?"

I affirm that it depends on the circumstance. In the case of refugees fleeing a war, certain death, as such- they do.

We owe them a share in the gifts that God has blessed us with.
Your answer might have some merit if the USA had some sort of money to give away. Every year we fall further and further in debt. As a country we don't have money to give to anyone. It will be very obvious soon that everyone will be fighting over scraps from the federal government.
Reply Quote
6
Daddy-O5
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to lobopride • 4:44p, 2/13/25
AG
Absolutely true. We're giving away money we don't have, AND at the expense of our own citizens, many of whom are getting less help than immigrants. It's not sustainable, soon (relatively) we'll have no more help to give.
Reply Quote
4
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PabloSerna • 6:15p, 2/13/25
AG
PabloSerna said:
Don't you affirm that all you have comes from God?


Everything. But so what? That has nothing to do with whether a citizen of country A has a right to the largesse of Country B. This belies your socialist/collectivist predilections. You have no idea how much I give to charity. You have no idea of the ways in which I share my blessings. I do both but could I do more? Absolutely. But you know what, in the ordo amoris I am focused on making sure my wife and my kids and my elderly parents have what they need.


Reply Quote
5
5 edits
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:35p, 2/13/25
AG
This is a good interview if you have the time:

Reply Quote
Quo Vadis?
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:44a, 2/14/25
Pablo, I think what you're missing in this instance is context from the other side of the argument.

We're not having this argument in a vacuum. We already have I would guess somewhere north of 20,000,000 illegal immigrants living in our country. We're for once trying to get a grip on our immigration policy which has been a joke since 1965, and what are we being told? "it's a grave sin to actually fix what is broken".

We are screaming at the rest of the world, in action and in words "DO NOT COME TO OUR COUNTRY". We have put up walls, we have put up barbed wire, we have agents swarming the border, yet still they come, and it's our fault when we send them back?

"A sovereign nation has the right to enforce its borders" yeah right. So long as they let anyone and everyone in who wants to come in, right?

The next time I need reconciliation I'm just going to break into the rectory and shake the priest out of bed, and demand he hear my confession, because I have judged my need is greater than his.

Reply Quote
8
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.