Are you angry about immigration? I am, and that puts me (for once) in the majority. Millions of Americans feel overwhelmed, threatened, and frankly outraged at the prospect of our country being inundated by tens of millions of poor, uneducated people who carry with them the habits engrained by corrupt, authoritarian countries. We fear that they will suppress the already low wages of unskilled American workers, that many will become new burdens on our strained public welfare system, and that most of them will vote for the party that will promise them more government benefits—the party of gay “marriage” and abortion. We resent the fact that most new immigrants (including those amnestied) will benefit from affirmative action—that is, discrimination at the expense of white male war veterans who have paid U.S. taxes all their lives.
In other words, we consider the prospect of mass, unskilled immigration both damaging to our country, and unjust to the citizens of every race who already live here.
But what about justice for immigrants? Let’s examine that. As I explained in the National Catholic Register, strict justice for illegal immigrants would mean that they would be deported. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the right to enter a country is conditional on fulfilling certain duties—exactly as a worker deserves a “just wage”only if he shows up for work and performs it. To keep his conditional right to immigrate, each entrant to a country must “obey its laws” (CCC 2241). That includes a country’s immigration and labor laws. By evading border guards, working “off the books,” and often committing identity theft in order to skirt America’s laws, most illegal immigrants have sadly forfeited their moral right to be here. That’s not me talking—that’s the Church.
I suspect that it would not be prudent to grant these immigrants what the Church says that they deserve—a swift return to their countries of origin. It might not be merciful. But it would be perfectly just.
When people call for “amnesty” or a “path to citizenship,” what they are asking for illegal immigrants is not justice but mercy—just as a criminal’s relatives might petition for parole based on good behavior. The state grants parole based on many factors, including how crowded the prison is, and how likely the person paroled is to reoffend. Likewise, when we consider granting an amnesty to the millions who have squandered their right to be immigrants by violating our laws, we have to consider the concrete effects of doing so.
Given that our borders are woefully insecure, that rumors of amnesty have led tens of thousands of parents to risk their children’s lives by shipping them to America, it certainly would not be prudent to grant an amnesty any time soon. Not till our borders are tight as a drum, and employers face prison time for hiring illegal workers, would it be safe to offer an amnesty. A hasty “path to citizenship” would simply lead thousands more to die in the desert, and leave our border states on the brink of chaos—at the mercy of human traffickers and narco-terrorist cartels.
Is there a sane way forward that would allow us to offer some measure of mercy to millions of people who have mostly worked hard and obeyed (some of) our laws? I would like to think so. I would hope that the liberals and the cheap labor lobby could put aside their naked self-interest for a while, and cooperate with conservatives in securing America’s borders, mandating enforcement of workplace verification, and tracking people who overstay their visas and removing them. At that point, the justified anger of Americans might subside. We might cease to fear that our country is lapsing into anarchy. And then, with cooler heads on every side, we could reexamine the question of granting mercy to illegal immigrants.
But I do not expect such a compromise any time soon. The open-borders lobby thinks that they smell victory, that they can mau-mau Americans into leaving our frontiers unguarded, and also granting citizenship (plus welfare benefits) to some 12 million people—in return for empty promises, exactly like those that came with our 1986 amnesty. Marco Rubio’s bill in 2012, which was already insufficient in its efforts to guard our borders, was gutted by Democrats and turned into such a sham that even its sponsor had to renounce it. The cheap-vote left and cheap-labor right refuse to bargain in good faith, so the best thing that Americans can do right now is stand firm until an electoral shift brings in better legislators. I am grateful to the Tea Party congressmen and senators like Ted Cruz who had the patriotic good sense last week to block reckless bills that would have offered cosmetic solutions, and increased the influx of illegal immigrants. Let’s remember the Hippocratic Oath and “first, do no harm.”
John Zmirak is co-author of the upcoming The Race to Save Our Century: Five Core Principles to Promote Peace, Freedom, and a Culture of Life.
Is there not an inconsistency in supporting the free movement of goods, the free movement of capital, but not the free movement of labour.
Is there not an inconsistency in supporting the free movement of goods, the free movement of capital, but not the free movement of labour.
—
No. Goods are inanimate objects. Credit and funds are abstractions. People make a society.
Uncommon common sense.
Thanks, Art. I was going to say that a man is not the same thing as a t-shirt or a dollar bill. I’m relieved to discover that somebody agrees with me. 😉
.
Concerning the question of consistency, will the same Catholics who argue for open borders, argue for open picket lines? Open entry to the teaching profession? To the cosmetology trades? etc
Secure the Border: end welfare.
You can’t make up stuff like this. Bill Gates wants open borders and Microsoft fires 18,000 “surplus” employees.
About 92 million Americans (ages 16 to 64) are unemployed or no longer looking for jobs – this is the lowest labor force participation in decades.
Milton Friedman said, “You can have a welfare state or open borders, but not both.”
Amnesty – because 12 million strangers and their exploitive employers decide it is economically beneficial to remake the law? Really!
“Is there not an inconsistency in supporting the free movement of goods, the free movement of capital, but not the free movement of labour.”
Capital and goods do not kill, rape or rob. Capital and goods do not bankrupt local clinics/hospitals and school districts. Capital and goods are assets/resources. Criminals, murderers and thieves are liabilities.
“No. Goods are inanimate objects. Credit and funds are abstractions. People make a society.”
Comment of the week Art! Take ‘er away Sam:
Funny that the Swedish Chief is in the video. I haven’t watched the Muppets in a long time, so I’m not familiar with the big brown bear and the penguin.
The Animal and Statler & Waldorf have always been my favorites when I was little.
T Shaw wrote, “You can’t make up stuff like this. Bill Gates wants open borders and Microsoft fires 18,000 “surplus” employees”
And he can open a plant anywhere in the world (free movement of capital) and import their products into the US (free movement of goods)
The permanently unemployed underclass created in this way will probably go on to “kill, rape and rob” in short order, if the post-industrial landscape of the UK is any guide.
[…] – Ta. Marshall PhD Congressman Blasts Obama of Silence on Genocide in Iraq – M. Hadro Strict Justice for Illegal Aliens Would Mean Deportation – J. Zmirak NYTimes: Pro-Marriage Advocates Don’t Deserve Civility – C. Holloway […]
MPS It doesn’t sound like you are talking about the free movement of labor instigated by the laborer himself, because he has the dignity of working “for himself” and if you are talking about moving the laborers around like so many tools, or means of production- you know people can not be considered capital. Read Laborem Excercens JPII
The permanently unemployed underclass created in this way will probably go on to “kill, rape and rob” in short order, if the post-industrial landscape of the UK is any guide.
—
I want you to explain to everyone here how it is that Mr. Gates can open a factory some place or engage in portfolio investment renders someone else ‘permanently unemployed’. Please recall that when some of my contemporaries were 1st entering the labor market, Mr. Gates’ company did not yet exist.
Gates and Buffet are just horrible examples of human kind. They are horrible examples of business men because of their inhumanity.
if the post-industrial landscape of the UK is any guide.
—
The labor force participation rate in Britain is slightly higher than it was in 1979 (by a fraction of a % point). Unemployment rates are higher as well, but not radically (5.5% in 1979 v. 6.6% today). Thatcher-the-milk-snatcher did not do you all the injuries Labour Party stalwarts fancy.
Gates and Buffet are just horrible examples of human kind. They are horrible examples of business men because of their inhumanity.
—
I do not know what’s so horrible about Microsoft or Berkshire Hathaway either as producers or as employers. These two men advocate inadvisable policy, but their pretty tame in that respect next to a real villain like Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
In the words of William Shakespeare, if every person was meted out “strict justice,” nobody would escape a whipping (Hamlet, Act 2, sc. ii, l. 492). The tortured reading of CCC 2241 here only shows the mental acrobatics required to bend the Church’s counsel to one’s ends. The language of the Catechism at no point makes the right to immigration contingent on first obeying the host country’s laws. Of course, it does not. As a general matter, the Catechism does not pass judgment on particular circumstances, leaving those judgments to competent authorities and properly formed consciences. If you took the application urged here to its logical end, you might end up saying something ridiculous like “Strict Justice for Nazi-era Jews Meant the Gas Chambers.” That is why the Catechism avoids a contingent statement and naturally prescribes only general principles: 1) states have duties; 2) immigrants have rights; 3) states also have rights to legislate; 4) immigrants acquire obligations to their host states. There is no language of one thing being conditional on another. If anything, the language seems to suggest that the duties of the migrants arise only AFTER they have been allowed to immigrate: “Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country THAT RECEIVES THEM …” But, who cares what the CCC says if you can twist it so in your mind it says what you want it to say?
For a careful analysis of the relevant section of the Catechism, see this article:
http://www.aleteia.org/en/politics/documents/how-catholics-should-think-about-immigration-2288001
Carlos X writes, “1) states have duties; 2) immigrants have rights; 3) states also have rights to legislate; 4) immigrants acquire obligations to their host states.”
Of course immigrants should obey the law – and so should states.
Immigrants do not fall into a single class. Refugees form an important sub-set of immigrants whose circumstances have received special recognition by the international community. Thus, the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (CRSR) provides that
“The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence. (Article 31, (1))
And
“No Contracting State shall expel or return (‘refouler’) a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion” (Article 33(1))
There are also important regional agreements that extend the definition of refugees beyond the CRSR definition (those with a well-founde fear of persecution) to those “compelled to leave his/her country owing to external aggression, occupation, foreign domination or events seriously disturbing public order in either part or the whole of his country of origin or nationality” (The Organisation of African Unity) and “Persons who flee their countries because their lives, safety or freedom have been threatened by generalised violence, foreign aggression, internal conflicts, massive violation of human rights or other circumstances which have seriously disturbed public order” (Cartegena Declaration – Central and South America)
There are other sub-sets, too, such as stateless persons, who are the subject of international conventions.
Of course the current immigrants are not refugees and if they were, under international law, the first receiving country is obliged to give them asylum. That would be Mexico and not the U.S. And it would be a violation of international law for Mexico to transport them across their country to the U.S.
The HHS Mandate would have no effect on Bill Gates. Gates never gave his workers any benefits. Gates’ employees were “rolling temps”, workers who were fired when time came for their benefits to begin. Gates and Melinda have donated millions of dollars to birth control and have the means, the unscrupulous means, to engineer society to their own advantage.
.
Buffet is a dying demi-gog.
I would argue the deporting illegal immigrants is both just and merciful: just to the illegal immigrants who lie, cheat and steal, and merciful to the taxpaying citizen who is the victim of those liars, cheaters and thieves.
PS , What Mary DeVoe correctly points is the reason why, even though I am a nuclear professional, I will never support Bill Gates’ Terrapower: http://terrapower.com/.
[…] via Strict Justice for Illegal Immigrants Would Mean Deportation | The American Catholic. […]
“Then the king will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’
“He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” (Matthew 25: 41-46)
May it be so.
You know Longing to Be Blind, we do all have our blind spots and we pray the Lord to help us to see and to discern His will.
.
Remember Mother Teresa of Calcutta felt sorry for our poverty in this country, our spiritual poverty.
All these people coming to America may well need food and clothing and shelter (they spent their life savings on coyotes) and I am all for doing what we can.
Also we can’t shrug off spiritual needs of thousands of people who may be tolerant of criminality for the sake of money.
If the new immigrants buy into what the left of America is offering them- we won’t be helping them. It is wrong to encourage immigrants to come here and be dependent. We can help them find what America really offers- the opportunity to work honestly and hard.
I’ve been a bleeding heart, enough, to know when I’ve been taken advantage of.
I think some of these people have been used and moved by other people for other people’s purposes. Like the human shields in Gaza, they are used for political purpose. And, some are willing to be used because… maybe it’s true that in America the streets are paved with gold and, as the little mouse Feival sang, “there’s no cats in America”
They’ll have to take personal responsibility and step up soon.
In this country we have a number of domestic problems and more brewing around the world. We need to have all our citizens on board, to carry their weight as much as possible and to help– like Rosie the riveter did.
I am willing to help how I can, but I don’t want to be used and turned on by the people I help.
These liberal progressive Democrats masquerading as Catholics and quoting Scripture to suit their false gospel of social justice, the common good and peace at any price at the expense of the True Gospel of Conversion and Repentance are becoming tiresome. Maybe One Who Longs To Be Blind should open up his or her house to the illegals and support them out of his or her own money instead of demanding that my tax money be appropriated for what he or she likely does not wish to do. It is NOT govt’s job to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, care for the sick, visit the imprisoned, etc. That is YOUR job, One Who Longs To Be Blind. YOU do what YOU advocate.
Blind,
If you were correct, it would be you who must feed, etc., not the government or the rich guy who you likely envy/hate and think doesn’t pay enough taxes.
There are now 92,000,000 Americans aged 18 to 64 that can’t get work. We need 12,000,000 more to allow the economic exploiters (the Chamber of Commerce branch of the GOP) to lower wages. What do you do for America’s native born poor?
The cartels and coyotes charge an average of $4,000 to $8,000 per illegal invader.
You quote a particular translation of Matthew. FYI the only Gospel with the Final Judgment scene.
In the translation I have Jesus said, “these the least of MY brothers.” Earlier in Matthew, Jesus tells us who are His brothers. That would be anyone “that does what My Father wants them to do.”
Are you saying God the Father Almighty wants these people to come here, break our laws, lie, steal poor people’s jobs and lower their wages, rape, murder, etc.?
The America-haters want them here to hasten the destruction of the evil, unjust American way of life.
Why don’t you take your dull, evil fabrications and place them where the Sun don’t shine?
And one other thing to Blind (God save me from insulting bats!):
.
I am married to an immigrant – a legal Filipina who had to work her pretty little behind off to get to where she is today.
.
And before we married, I house in my own apartment on my own cognizance two of her immigrant friends free of charge for three months (it was kind of crowded), and then after she and I married, we of course started living together (duh!) and housed one of the immigrants in the apartment we got after we married, and we did that free of charge. Sadly, because of the Obama government we could only afford to help one. Thank God the other found a job. And now the last remaining one has a job. We did our duty and we would do it again if there is any money left after your accursed social government finishes raping my paycheck.
,
BTW, both immigrants are visiting my wife back east while I am on nuclear assignment out west keeping your lights on and your computer energized, doing something useful with my life. We all just finished Skyping together.
.
So you take your godless social justice at the behest of nanny government and shove it. I despise and loathe liberal progressive demokracy.
The Catholic Establishment is dishonest and a bad actor on this issue. I dismiss it from formulating any so-called “solutions”. Immigration is not a right. What is best for foreigners can never be the focus of our immigration policies, only citizens and their interests. Americans have lost control over their own destiny and the future of their country thanks in part to Catholics and their duplicity on this issue.
At a time when 92,000,000+ Americans have been forced out of labor markets in favor of foreigners, when most industry wages have flat-lined or declined, immigration ought to be zero or even negative. Volunteering in a food pantry, I see the pain, the struggle, the anger Americans have. While Catholics may feel obligations to citizens of other countries, Americans have no such duty, legally or morally. Even so, Americans are and have been the most generous people, contributing to citizens of other countries time and time again. Catholics are not satisfied with our charity overseas. They must destroy the country by funding and encouraging a foreign invasion to the detriment of our people.
American citizens are attacked physically by Catholic-protected foreigners pouring into the U.S. Citizens are murdered, raped, beaten, victimized by identity thieves, fraud schemes, of which senior citizens especially are victims. Will the Church make these people whole? Doubtful, as they are for the most part not “Catholic”.
American children are the sacrificial lambs of open borders and the drug cartels which seek to destroy their lives with the blessing and encouragement of the Catholic Church. I wonder how many Catholic dioceses are receiving laundered drug money? How many benefit from contributions by cartels or human traffickers? I don’t hear any Catholics clamoring for employers to hire Americans.
The disingenuous Catholic mantra is that we must find ways to surrender our country to foreigners. We must accommodate their needs, their families, their culture, their crime, their endless, overwhelming problems because that, and that alone is the “Christian” thing to do. I do not share this interpretation of Christian duty.
Catholics (along with the Baptists) have, for some 3 years prior to the Obama Administration’s orchestrated and manipulated current (but certainly not the only) invasion of our borders, solicited and been awarded federal contracts and grants by the Regime to “get ready” for the current mob. While Americans recoil in horror as they watch the chaos, Catholics pretend to “help”. Help Americans? No, silly! Help the invaders! They knew this day would arrive, because they have been planning it. I feel nothing but contempt for your religion which seems to be based on a need to destroy decent peoples’ lives with their money.
Finally, I will never forget or forgive the fact that Catholics, through their “ministries” are responsible for the importation of refugee terrorists like the Tsarnaev family. That alone ought to have disqualified Catholic organizations from competing for federal contracts, grant or other public funds. The Catholic Establishment has proven itself not only unworthy of our trust, but in violation of every moral or other standard, when it comes to safety or security of the country.
Shame on you. Shame!
At a time when 92,000,000+ Americans have been forced out of labor markets in favor of foreigners
–
The total population of employed persons in this country is about 143 million, of whom about 23 million are foreign born. I think you’ve misplaced a decimal point.
In the 1980’s, they pulled this crap. In the 2010’s,they’ve run out of other people’s money and they (the pinkos/reds out to ruin the evil, unjust US’ WAY OF LIFE and the Chamber of Comm. Br. of the GOP) think that bringing in 50,000,000 more people with no money will help?? I get the 50MM number from the experience the US had after Reagan passed comprehensive immig reform for several years in the mid-1980’s.
AD: Google it. The number 92MM out of work and/or the work force is widely accepted, but you (and Ted Cruz) are a racist if you cite. The labor participation rate is the lowest in 30 years. Pretty soon more people will be taking money from the gov than paying taxes to the gov.
.
A lot of the 92MM are “younger” workers that took early retires and/or were “able” to get on disability, which is at historically high level. Also, a record 47MM live on food stamps.
In the 1980’s, they pulled this crap. In the 2010’s,they’ve run out of other people’s money and they (the pinkos/reds out to ruin the evil, unjust US’ WAY OF LIFE and the Chamber of Comm. Br. of the GOP) think that bringing in 50,000,000 more people with no money will help?? I get the 50MM number from the experience the US had after Reagan passed comprehensive immig reform for several years in the mid-1980’s.
AD: Google it. The number 92MM out of work and/or the work force is widely accepted, but you (and Ted Cruz) are a racist if you cite. The labor participation rate is the lowest in 30 years. Pretty soon more people will be taking money from the gov than paying taxes to the gov.
.
Have to run. God helps those that help themselves.
Alecta, it is interesting you talk about the Catholic Establishment. I think you find the same dissatisfaction with some of the decisions and actions of professional catholics and spokesmen for bishops among the crowd that reads this blog.
I don’t know if you belong to a church or not, but I guess you know that we are catholic Catholics — “here comes everybody!”
Though some may think we are automatons ordered about by our pope- there is room for lots of lateral movement while still in obedience to the Teaching Authority of the Church, Scripture and Tradition.
I agree “shame on you” for some of our Catholic “establishment” for some of their actions, but I do not say shame on all Catholics.
Illegal immigration began in the Americas in 1492, and in what is now called New England in the United States, in 1620. Presently the United States has set priority on deportation of those among the undocumented individuals who commit crimes while here. Government does not have the financial resources to deport everyone with attention to those who are endangered by deportation. Children deported immediately would fall into the hands of sex-traffickers, unless we intend to provide them with southbound ‘coyotes’ to their home towns where they could make the necessary choice between criminal gangs and sex-traffickers.
I would not call myself Christian if I supported the deportation of children seeking a decent life, unless my country had taken steps to assure that their former home had become and would remain safe in terms of what Americans expect their neighborhoods to be.
I wonder what Pope Francis would think of this article.
NBWMuslim is correct. The government ran out of other people’s money. M. Friedman, “You can have open borders or the welfare state, but not both.”
The government should place the poor, unaccompanied children (that came up with $4,000 to $8,000 to come here) in adoptive, Christian conservative families where they will be raised as Christian citizens.
Put an end to the welfare state and the illegal invasion will end. It’s worth a try.
Nanabedokw’Môlsem wrote:
.
“Illegal immigration began in the Americas in 1492, and in what is now called New England in the United States, in 1620.”
.
There was no unified nation here in North America when people from Europe began settling. Thus, there was no illegal immigration.
.
For all those liberal progressive adherents to the false gospel of social justice, the common good and peace at any price, until you do what my wife and I did – welcome into your home and care for immigrants free of charge – you are not entitled to an opinion. What you advocate is that we the tax payers fund your social conscience to do what you are demonstrably unwilling to do with your own personal money. You do NOT have authority to steal from the tax payer’s paycheck the moneys you claim to need to support your weak-kneed, yellow-bellied, cowardly pseudo-conscience.
.
One last thing: I agree completely with T. Shaw. Put the immigrant children in orthodox conservative traditionalist Catholic Christian homes and drive out from them the demons of that damnable gospel of envy preached everywhere by the apostates and heretics who call themselves liberal and extoll social justice at the expense of repentance and salvation.
Children deported immediately would fall into the hands of sex-traffickers,
Put ’em on a boat back to their point of origin. They’ll only fall into the hands of ‘sex traffickers’ if their relatives have in fact been pimping them.
==
Government does not have the financial resources to deport everyone with attention to those who are endangered by deportation.
==
Putatively, about 300,000 people overstay their visas every year. Back in the day, police, courts, and prisons in New York could process 250,000 cases per annum from arrest to conviction and remand with a staff of just north of 90,000. Add 20% to that and you get around about 108,000, which is twice the staffing of the New York City PD, which has a budget of about $9.5 bn. The federal government can ‘afford’ $19 bn per annum to reduce the net increment to the visa scofflaws to nil. The question is whether their can be the will and focus to build a complex of agencies to do the work.
==
As for sealing the southern border, please recall we built 38,000 miles of Interstates in this country. A 1,900 mile long cement wall topped with razor wire and equipped with guard towers is not an impossible engineering feet. You have five shifts of guards every 1,200 yards or so, about 400 patrol cars per shift, and a support staff of administration, detention centers, and hearing examiners. With amortization of construction costs, annual maintenance, staffing, and equipment, it should set you back about $8 bn a year.
—
The federal government can afford $27 bn per year.
Zimrack….Mr.Black and White…it’s so simple.Hell if the Catechism says it , at least in your mind, it must be true. “Strict”justice makes your top down position seem closer to the message of the Pharisees and Saducees instead of the message of Jesus.All minors seeking asylum from their crime and corruption ridden home countries are here because of Obama…. not because it’s America’s traditions???
Pass comprehensive Immigration legislation and go to Mass.
Wow, a reference to both Pharisees and Sadducees. No mean trick. Of course what was lacking was anything rambling a cogent argument other than the implicit notion that George is morally superior to the rest of you. Such is what passes for argumentation on the social justice side of the spectrum nowadays.
All minors seeking asylum from their crime and corruption ridden home countries are here because of Obama…. not because it’s America’s traditions???
—
“America’s ‘traditions'” do not include unrestricted immigration.
The prophet Isaiah has a few words for George:
.
If you take away from the midst of you the yoke,
the pointing of the finger, and speaking wickedness,
if you pour yourself out for the hungry
and satisfy the desire of the afflicted,
then shall your light rise in the darkness
and your gloom be as the noonday.
.
Isaiah 58:9b-10
.
You, George, do NOT get to appropriate my income for your social justice taxes to do the work that Isaiah says YOU ought to be doing. It is NOT the job of government to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, care for the sick, welcome the stranger. That is YOUR job. YOU do it.
.
And yes, if you read some of my comments above, you will find that my wife and I have put our money where our mouth is. We do NOT want government help. We do NOT want illegal immigration. Let everyone do what my wife did when she came over from the Philippines: instead of succumbing to your gospel of envy, she worked her pretty little tail off, got her Visa, green card, whatever and is now two years away from citizenship.
.
No free lunch! When Jesus fed the crowd in John chapter 6, they followed Him around the lake looking for another free handout. They did NOT get any such handout. They got told to seek the Bread that does not perish. That’s a lesson you liberal social justice types are incapable of comprehending – or I should say, not incapable but unwilling. Rebellious are you all, and possessed of the every Pharasaical (or is it Pharasitical?) self-righteous hypocrisy that you think you see in those on the right of the political spectrum.
Sorry, folks, It boils my blood to read liberals’ advocating what we ought to do to welcome the immigrant and not a one of them housed two immigrants in their apartment for three months, fed them, and provided for their needs till they could get to their own two feet and find work. I hate – absolutely despise, loathe, abhor and detest – the gospel of social justice. It is vile vomit from the depths of the bowels.
PWP: Don’t hold back, now. Just tell us what you think.
Bravo! Both comments.
Is George’s last name, “Costanza?”