A quick presentation for higher clergy

General
1

So I’ve noticed that cardinals and very reverend types have a problem learning the difference between immigrants. Key word: Immigrants, used as a blanket term

First I’d like clarity a few other things for priests that use language like “We are a nation of immigrants” or “Our city was built by immigrants” or “This church is for immigrants”.

First of all: the USA is NOT a nation of immigrants.
Second of all: sanctuary cities are a crime.
Third of all: Aiding and abetting illegal aliens is a crime
Fourth: violating our immigration and labor laws is also a crime
Fifth: felony identification theft is a crime.

I can go on and on but you hopefully understand. And I type this because a lot of higher level priests seriously DO NOT understand the above.

Now, for the lesson.

There are two types of immigrants. It is exceedingly dishonest to continue referring to all immigrants as just “immigrants” as a blanket term, you know, to conceal the truth.

The truth is that there are

  1. legal immigrants. These are people who follow the laws.
  2. ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. These are people who disregard our laws and usually does not end there because they break numerous laws all the time, and every day they are here illegally.

So that’s the lesson. Send it on out to all the cardinals who have acted dishonestly about this matter. Good day & God bless!

2

I am a registered Libertarian and there are more than two views when it comes to the topic of immigration.

  • There are closed borders libertarians (No one can enter our borders without permission and if caught are deported.)
  • There are open border libertarians (Individuals should have the right to trade freely, escape from tyranny and not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. This means keeping you from leaving the United States if she become tyrannical. You should not need permission to leave, but may need permission to enter another country. What is “unreasonable” is debated among various libertarians.)
  • There are State-Border libertarians (Leave it up to each State to enforce their own borders. I know very few libertarians who hold this view.)
  • There are private-property bordertarians (You have the right to allow/exclude whomever you want onto/from your private property. Just like there the walls of your house is a border, these libertarians include your property line as a border in which you enforce yourself. Some believe it is the role of the state to protect your private property, in addition to yourself.)
  • There are closed-borders-until-we-end-government-programs libertarians (Incentives & entitlements that encourage individuals to come here illegally is what these libertarians view as theft and redistribution of wealth by force.)
  • And then there are other views that are less common.

I can see valid arguments of a few different points of view. As the great Thomas Sowell said in A Conflict of Visions, “There are no real solutions, only trade-offs.”

My problem with most Democrats is that they only look at the benefits of open borders and not the trade-offs (diseases, homelessness, crime, a breakdown of order, etc.)

My problem with how many Republicans frame it is how they paint all illegal immigrants as violent criminals. Some are. We had a Hispanic off-duty police officer shot, along with two others, by an illegal immigrant at a bar. The officer, a husband and father did not make it. Extremely sad and would not have happened had this individual not been here illegally. However, we also had a woman who was rąped and murdered by a man who was born and raised in the United States! It later came out that he was a serial rąpist (11 other woman that we know of)! A few months back we had a stabbing outside of a local bar. The individual was also not an illegal immigrant. You get my point.

The Bible tells us that, as Christians, we are to treat “aleans” with human dignity and respect. Jesus also said that if someone is robbing you of your coat (and you have two), then just give the man with no coat your extra coat. This, however, is not a legal framework. This is a voluntary giving and not involuntary Socialism.

To the open-border individuals, I tell them that I will be over for Dinner tonight and raid their fridge, and tomorrow night, and the night after that. If they have a problem with this, then they are hypocrites. To the closed-border individuals I ask what they would do if your politicians no longer adhere to the Constitution & Bill of Rights, should you be free to leave? Does the government have a right to decide whom you should be able to do business with? How closed borders are you?

I lean more towards the private-property model and closed-border hybrid model. This means that if you would like to invite someone from another country to be a United States citizen (with limited rights, similar to Japan) then you would be held responsible for these individuals. Meaning that if they starve to death, then you are held accountable. If they commit a crime, then you are held responsible. If you hold these individuals against their will, then you will be held responsible. If you make them do forced labor, then you will be held responsible. So be wise whom you sponsor and do not mistreat individuals that you do sponsor. The part that would be like Japan’s model is that non-native citizens would not have the privilege of voting. This would eliminate the Democrats from abusing the immigration system to cheat in elections (hypothetically). I’m against entitlement programs for native-born citizens, so of course I would not extend them to non-native-born citizens. I believe that it is the role of charity to take care of one another. Involuntary Socialism always ends in starvation and genocide.

Thoughts?

3

You have a right to be against the programs, Cade, but I (a native-born US citizen) and my wife (an immigrant US citizen) depend on Social Security and Medicare. I have a retirement annuity that by itself would pay the rent, but food, medical care, and all our other expenses would not be paid for. Conceivably we could hold jobs, but we don’t have the strength or energy that we used to (we are both in our 70s).

5

If I were elected (I have been asked to run for office, but I have no desire to rule over others), I would allow individuals to opt-out of these programs. I understand that many have become dependent on government (by design). I also understand that you and I have payed into these programs and we ought to get back that which we have payed in. Why is laser eye surgery so cheap in this country compared to other surgeries? It isn’t because eyes are not important. I would say that our eyes are very important. It is because insurance does not cover the procedure and there is coopetition, which drives the cost down. You don’t have that when you are on a system where government spends money she doesn’t have or insurance pays for things. Why does a paint pill cost a hundred dollars when you are in the Hospital, something you can get for a few bucks at a gas station or grocery store? Same reason. It is easy to spend someone else’s money, but when it is our own money, cost matters.

Some demand “free” healthcare, but positive rights are immoral and do not come from God. They require someone else’ labor (either through force or theft). Nothing is free unless it is a gift or charity, voluntarily given. I’m all for free education (if teachers want to donate their time and resources to educate). I’m all for free healthcare (if Doctors freely donate their time and resources to provide care). I’m all for charitable organizations to providing such resources. And I’m all for citizens to give to such organization voluntarily.

“No action can be virtuous unless it is freely chosen.” — Murray N. Rothbard

6

I don’t pay a hundred dollars for paint pills, but they do make me turn blue.

1 Like
7

We’ve been renovating the downstairs for my Wife’s future Salon Studio :joy:

1 Like
8

Fact is, all of our ancestors were immigrants. They came here and kicked the Native American people off their own lands, put them on “reservations”, and when they found out that there was oil or some other thing to be gained, they kicked them off the reservations. And when they came here, they didn’t have visas or passports…just an idea that they had the rights to everything, and to hell with the people who lived here for thousands of years.

As far as illegal immigrants today, they’re only here for one reason. They can’t survive in their own countries of origin. Otherwise, why would they bother to make the journey, and risk border patrol, and deportation. So maybe we should ask Jesus how he would treat these people if they are hungry, and wishing they had a job.

In truth, there’s only one planet we’re all standing on. It’s only divided up into pieces for business purposes. Whose planet is it? It God’s planet. And everyone is God’s child. This is our philosophy. No one should be hungry. There’s more than enough to go around. Just a small group of greedy politicians who use the government for maintaining the status quo of protecting their personal wealth.

So…the people you resent…they are your brothers…some of them may be more connected to Jesus than you or me. But the big guns in power, they make this propaganda…bad immigrants, bad immigrants. But is free health care available in this country that is one of the wealthiest in the world? Is there free education for people who can get good grades at university? No. they’ll give you a loan with interest rates that keep you paying back for years after graduation. And they make laws against immigrants…immigrants that are children of God, just like you and me. And you believe them. This is called hegemony. In this way people support a system that exploits all of us.

9

This was not a country back when native Americans were here. It was basically the freest and most open land in the world. But it was not an established country back then.

My point is that during the Biden/Soros era our American Cardinals were basically like CNN talk boxes. They were all using the same buzzwords. More importantly they MISUSED the teaching of the Bible while “Catholic Charities” RAMPAGED our country.

They were a bunch of turncoat Cardinals to be frank. And they KEEP covering up their tracks about “immigration”. The Cardinals exposed themselves as shysters. They just played along with the tyranny.

California was completely invaded and still is…

We’re not talking about a busload of crop pickers. Our country has over 45 MILLION illegals here now. It was a full scale invasion conducted by over 120 different countries and multiple Continents, including terrorists and serious criminals.

You can’t refer to that as just plain old “immigration”.

I find it disgusting that the Cardinals behaved so dishonestly. They continue to as well.

11

You had me in the first paragraph, but by the end you sound like you are proposing slavery. I’m not about that.

13

“most of the illegal immigrants today are coming and taking advantage of resources and programs, benefitting from what past generations built without contributing.” “Most” could be anything from 51% to 99%. Can you please give us some solid numbers and tell us where you got them?