My Photo

Insight Scoop

Catholic World News Top Headlines (

The Curt Jester


Poor Box

Render Unto Us

Tip Jar
Blog powered by Typepad

« "Father Dale" Fallout: Life Teen Founder Indicted For Sexual Misconduct With Young Men Is At Odds With His Diocese | Main | If You Tell Alaska Airlines You’re Gay You Get A 10% Discount »

Thursday, November 29, 2007



Thomistic – I have the answers to your questions!

1) The food in your fridge is a “common good of the earth” that anyone can help themselves to. Socialists don’t like the idea of private property. Even if that socialist is a bishop of the Church.
2) Standing up against abortion isn’t very PC. If the bishop did that then he might have to do something like deny a pro-choice politician communion or something like that. That’s not going to make you very popular!

Lord have mercy . . .


I attended a "Catholic" university and there was a lot of nonsense about how "Social Justice" is necessary and quite a bit of populist love for socialism thrown in the mix. It's the dying remnants of the 60's who, as carolg mentioned, don't like the idea of private property.

How does one best spread the idea that private property rights are consistent with the Gospel of Jesus (after all, one must own goods in order to drop all and follow Him)? I was sucked into the populist trap in college and it took me about 4 or 5 years to get straight.

I do think private charities and churches should help immigrants legally enter the country and provide a solution that involves not giving people incentives to break the law.


How many illegals is this phony giving room and board to at the episcopal "residence"?


"They've come to regard people who are illegal immigrants as having fewer rights than people who are legal. In the eyes of God, we all have equal rights, and we have the obligation to love them," he said.

"The fact that they're here illegally is not the only issue. They're still people, and we have to deal with them with dignity," he said.

The immigration law, House Bill 1804, which went into effect Nov. 1, makes it a felony to knowingly transport illegal immigrants, creates barriers to hiring them and restricts benefits they can receive from the government.

I wish this bishop were more precise. The fact is, all people are entitled to basic human rights and should be treated with dignity. However, illegal aliens are not entitled to those rights which are conferred by the privilege of citizenship.

The immigration law, House Bill 1804, which went into effect Nov. 1, makes it a felony to knowingly transport illegal immigrants, creates barriers to hiring them and restricts benefits they can receive from the government.

In the 22-page pastoral letter, Slattery said that since the intention of HB1804 is immoral, its effects will be an intolerable increase in suffering of illegal immigrants, and those who must enforce the law.

The bishop is dead wrong for calling this bill immoral. I wonder if the exodus of illegal aliens from his diocese will reduce the total from the collection baskets.

He said that the United States needs comprehensive immigration reform to restore the rule of law on the borders and to protect the nation against infiltration.

I really hate the term "comprehensive immigration reform." It is a code word for "let's reward everyone who came illegally and let everyone else in legally."

Mark Bauman

The bishop's letter is flawed, one flaw being self-contradiction. He claims that the law is immoral because it would prohibit illegal immigrants from working. He also states that the U.S. immigration system is schizophrenic in that we put up a "No Trespassing" sign at the border but a "Help Wanted" sign at the factory.

Well, Your Excellency, doesn't the law effectively take down the "Help Wanted" sign and thereby abolish the schizophrenia in the U.S. immigration system?


"The fact that they're here illegally is not the only issue. They're still people, and we have to deal with them with dignity,"

If a convicted murderer broke out of jail and I found him in my hiding in my garage, I would treat him with dignity. I would offer him something to eat and I would offer him shelter.... right after I call the police to come take him back.

treating criminals with dignity and enforcing the laws are not mutually exclusive.


No new laws are needed, merely enforce all existing immigration laws.

Our nation's laws are not "evil" or "unfair." We have an elaborate specific process which allows our laws to reflect our basic law (Constitution) which is derived from Natural Law and Judeo-Christian law and tradition.

This bishop is merely lousey and ignorant; kind of like the hippy Leftist "green" pope Benedict.

Enforce laws first against those illegal aliens who have committed and been convicted of other (and violent) crimes subsequent to entering America ILLEGALLY. That number is supposed to be about three million of the illegal aliens.

That action of enforcement will also signal the other illegal aliens that in fact we are enforcing and will enforce our immigration laws.

Next enforce the immigration laws against at least ONE large employer of illegals in each congressional district. Do it publicly and enforce the law, all of the fines and all of the legal hoops and hurdles and run the employer through the ringer (kind of like if you make a minescule stupid mistake on your stupid income tax forms).

Then proceed with enforcement of all the rest; steady, constantly, step by step, day by day.

No need for a STUPID Maginot WALL at the border. My dumb assed congressman got his picture taken and put on his dumb ass newsletter showing him walking through a concrete lined and electric lighted tunnel that you could drive a car through and it runs right underneath the wonderful border fence that already exists on the Mexico border, which these phony bribe taking fools want to extend across two thousand miles more. How would you like that damned thing built adjacent to YOUR land?

If the illegals know they cannot get an illegal job they will NOT come here over the border and they will all return to Mexico when they lose their existing job.

It is ONLY the promise of the craven horrible corrupt Senators and congressmen and President Bush that all these illegals will get citizenship which keeps them all here, now that the last nail has been pounded into the last house in the spec real estate price inflation bubble.

WANT TO ANSWER THE DISRUPTION which these rotten corrupt President and congressmen caused?

IMMEDIATELY approve the entire SIX MILLION pending LEGAL applications for immigration which have been pending and withering in in boxes of our rotten corrupt Immigration and Naturalization Service for the past umpteen years, from people all over the world who are willing to comply with OUR laws.

ONE EXCEPTION - ZERO - ZERO - ZERO approvals of ANY applicants from Mexico.

Not for one hundred years.

Call it the G.W.Bush-Vincente Fox Exception.

Atlanta Catholic

Sad but true, there are Cardinals, Bishops and priests who are only interested in illegal immigration because it helps further their homosexual agenda.

They realize there is strength in numbers. They are working very hard to foster a debt of gratitude in these illegal immigrants. The payback will come when they expect these same people to support Cardinals, Bishops and priests who have strived to cross the borders of accepting their homosexual lifestyles. This is their meaning of Social Justice. There is no such thing as a free lunch. These wolves in sheep's clothing are seizing this issue to promote their own open borders!


"comprehensive immigration reform." = Amnesty

Let's not kid ourselves


If you're going to drop a bomb, maybe you should do it at the end of your comments, so you don't waste all those words. I stopped reading at
"the hippy Leftist "green" pope Benedict".


joanne -

What did I leave out? The Alaska Airlines thing is a different issue.


The good bishop is very confused. He is confusing legal rights of citizenship with the duty of respect we owe all people.

How do people who show such atrocious grasp of thinking skills and logic become bishops?

The Bishop would also probably assert that people who sneak into movie theatres are entitled to the exact same rights and privilges as those who paid to enter the theartre. What nonsense is that? It would be immoral to ask them to leave, would it Bishop? The movie sneaks should still be accorded human dignity (they shouldn't be murdered or tortured, for instance), but they should also be shown the door and not allowed to return. Doesn't sound too unfair to me.

We have teachers who are unable to discern their right from left.


"the hippy Leftist "green" pope Benedict"

I agree with joann. although it is a time saver when people are honest up front.


Simple, just stop giving financial support to him and make it clear why the support was stopped. Concerted efforts by the laity in each diocese is what is needed.


I wonder if B16 knows he's a hippie. My guess is no.


I wonder what vocations are like in this diocese? I wonder how many kids stop going to Mass after Confirmation and never go back except for furneral and the occasional wedding?

J. Thomas

Wow, how screwed up are we? How much of this comment sheet is totally ad hominum and irrelevant? If you don't agree with the man, discuss the issue.

Have you ever known any illegal immigrants? Most of them are hard-working people. Honestly, if my family and I lived in squalor and I lived just south of the border, bossed over by an utterly corrupt government, I might do the same thing. In any case, it would be very tempting.

The bishop has a point, and a good one.

As far as the solution; the only solution, like it or not, is eventual amnesty for most of the people who are here. Do you really expect Americans to watch the mass deportation of some nine or ten million people? Husbands separated from wives, children from parents? Do you think we really would do that? No way.

Seal off the border, right away, absolutely. But you have to deal with the people already here (gasp!) in a humane way; which means neither breaking up their families nor trying to starve them out, and consequently starving many of them in the process.

After all, if we're willing to stop at nothing to deport hard-working, harmless, and (not to mention) mostly Catholic people, what kind of America are we protecting?

J. Thomas,

I am originally from Los Angeles. Where are you from, Vermont? I have known many illegal immigrants. I have lived among them. You are correct that most of them are hardworking people. However, among the the illegal immigrant population (hardworking or not) there exist a significant number of criminals, disease carriers and those who take advantage of our welfare system.

I knew an unmarried illegal immigrant woman who had many children, each with a different father, each collecting welfare. The mother couldn't speak a word of English even though she had been here for five years. She cleaned houses for cash when she felt like it. Then there was the apartment building across the alley. A Mexican illegal immigrant would try to pimp one of his female relatives to those who passed by. I could here the screams of the Guatemalan women who was being beaten by her alcoholic, out-of-work Brazilian husband. Then there were the drunk parties in the alley that lasted all weekend--complete with Ranchera music which could be heard for blocks (and kept everyone awake). On a number of occasions, fights would break out and people were stabbed or shot.

I had to be careful where I ate because of the possibility of hepatitis as the result of poor hygiene on the part of illegal alien restaurant workers. There is also the issue of drug-resistant tuberculosis and brain parasites. I saw old ladies being ripped-off, for thousands of dollars, by illegal aliens doing shoddy work without the proper training or permits (concrete paving, tree-trimming, etc.). Many illegal aliens buy an old truck and go into business, but they don't know what they are doing. Half the people I ran into had limited or no English skills. There is also the issue of the many American-born children of illegal immigrants. Why don't you try living among a large population of teenage males full of old-fashioned Latin machismo with a strong does of peasant culture anti-intellectualism thrown in? You can watch the gang fights and try to avoid being a victim of crime (good luck). By now, you probably think that I lived in a barrio, but I didn't. I lived on the Westside. Houses in my neighborhood sell for $800,000+.

About one third of the illegal immigrant population in California is making use of the welfare system through their American-born children. And, Illegal immigrants are a net drain on our social services (schools, hospitals, etc).

You are also correct in pointing out that if you or I found ourselves in the same position we would be tempted to enter the U.S. illegally. But, half the world's population (the poor) would probably like to enter the United States. Should we open the borders to them all because we sympathize with their plight?

As for the bishop, I find myself wondering if he is motivated by money and power. If their are more Mass-going illegal immigrants in a diocese, there is more money in the collection baskets and more political clout for the leader of the diocese.

As for a solution, the American people have made it clear that they want ENFORCEMENT FIRST before there is any discussion of amnesty. People may soften a little on the issue of amnesty if they see that the federal government is serious about closing the back door. So far, the government has not shown any interest in stopping illegal immigration because the wealthy elite want illegal immigration to continue, and we have the best politicians money can buy.

Furthermore, granting amnesty to those already here is unfair to those who have been waiting in line for years to migrate legally. How would you feel if you were to see illegal immigrants rewarded with legal status after you have waited for years to migrate legally (and shelled out lots of money)?

We have been through this amnesty bit before. In 1987 amnesty was granted to 3 million illegal aliens and laws were passed to prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants. The employer sanctions were never enforced. If we were to simply enforce the employer sanctions from the 1987 amnesty bill many illegal aliens would simply self-deport (and stop with the starvation talk!). If we want to be more humane, we can allow a 2-5 year window for self-deportation. That would allow enough time for illegal immigrants to get their affairs in order and save some money which would go a long way in their home countries. They can then go home and reform their own countries instead of begging for a job here and being exploited by the rich.


Patrick posted the above comment. I erase cookies then forget to enter my name again.


I find your comments offensive Thomistic! People who come here ilegally from other countries do so at a great personal risk. Many die in the process and do not come here to steal from anyone. Those who come to the U.S to work pay taxes in many cases but are not entitled to any benefits because of their status. They pay into a system but cannot recieve any of the benefits of taxpayers - who stealing from who? Many, if not most of the children of illegal immigrants are naturalized American citizens entitled to the same benefits you and I are entitled to yet because of fearful parents, services and rights are not sought - who's being ripped off there? Maybe you should take a second look @ Sacred Sripture and see how many times the issue of welcoming the stranger comes up - it would be an eye opener for you. Shame on you for not realizing all the suffering immigrants have and continue to endure because of attitudes similar to yours. Shame on you!



Here are the facts:

WASHINGTON (June 6, 2007) — As they debate legalization for illegal immigrants, Senators would do well to keep in mind the most recent data on welfare use by the people in question. According to the Department of Homeland Security, nearly 60% of illegal aliens are from Mexico and 80% of the total are from Latin America as a whole. A Center for Immigration Studies analysis of 2006 Census Bureau data, which includes legal and illegal immigrants, shows use of welfare by households headed by Mexican and Latin American immigrants is more than double that of native households. Among the findings:

*51% of all Mexican immigrant households use at least one major welfare program and 28% use more than one program.
– 40% use food assistance, 35% use Medicaid, 6% use cash assistance.

*45% of all Latin American immigrant households use at least one welfare program and 24% use more than one program.
– 32% use food assistance, 31% use Medicaid, 6% use cash assistance.

*20% of native households use at least one welfare program and 11% multiple programs.
– 11% use food assistance, 15% use Medicaid, 5% use cash assistance.

*Among Mexican and Latin American households, welfare use is somewhat higher for households headed by legal, as opposed to illegal, immigrants. Thus legalization will likely increase welfare costs still further.

*90% of Mexican and Latin American households have at least one worker. Their heavy welfare use reflects their low education levels and resulting low incomes – and not an unwillingness work.
– 61% of all Mexican immigrants have not graduated high school.
– 48% of all Latin American immigrants have not graduated high school.

*There is a common but mistaken belief that welfare programs are only for those who don’t work. Actually, the welfare system is designed to provide low-wage workers, or more often their children, things like food assistance and health care.

*It is the presence of their U.S.-born children coupled with their low education levels that explains why so many immigrant households use the welfare system.

*Most recently arrived immigrants are barred from using welfare programs and this would likely apply to those legalized by the Senate bill – however this is not true in every state, nor does not apply to all programs. Most important, the bar does not apply to the U.S.-born children of immigrants, who are immediately eligible.

*There are an estimated 1.4 million households headed by illegal aliens using at least one major welfare program. If even half these families returned to their home countries, the savings for taxpayers could be substantial.

*If we do not wish to make a large share of illegals return to their home countries, then the United States has to accept the welfare costs. There is no other option.

*Programs examined in the analysis are food stamps, WIC, school lunch, Medicaid, TANF, SSI, and public/rent-subsidized housing.

If Illegals Stay, So Will Welfare Costs: The heavy use of welfare by immigrants from those parts of the world that send the most illegals is relevant to the question of whether to allow illegal immigrants to stay or, alternatively, to enforce the law and cause them to return home. The figures reported above are drawn directly from the best government data available, and show that allowing illegals to stay creates significant welfare costs. Many of the welfare costs described above are due to the presence of U.S.-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, the prohibition on new immigrants using some welfare programs makes little difference because their U.S.-citizen children will continue to be eligible. We estimate that nearly 400,000 children are born to illegal aliens each year.

Welfare Use by Working Immigrant Families: Most immigrants from Mexico and Latin America hold jobs. Their heavy use of the welfare system is due to the fact that a very large share have little education and as a result are able to earn only low incomes in the modern American economy, even though they work. The welfare system is geared toward helping low-income workers, especially those with children. Their education levels and the presence of U.S.-born children means welfare use will be extensive.

Tax Payments: Of course, immigrants, including illegal aliens, also pay taxes. However, because of the education level and resulting incomes levels of Mexican and Latin American immigrants, their tax payments are much less than natives on average. The same is true for illegal aliens. In a 2004 study, the Center for Immigration Studies estimated that illegal alien households used about $2,700 more services than they paid in taxes at the federal level only. We also found that households headed by a legal Mexican immigrant created a net fiscal drain at the federal level of roughly $15,000, and for those with only a high school degree the drain was a little over $3,700. However, those with more education were a fiscal benefit. A new Heritage Foundation study estimated the net fiscal drain at all levels of government created by households headed by high school dropout immigrants at about $20,000 a year. A 1997 National Research Council study found the same pattern – less-educated immigrants create a net fiscal drain and educated immigrants create a net fiscal benefit.

Data Source: The data for this analysis come from the Annual Social and Economic Supplement of the Current Population Survey (CPS) collected by the Census Bureau in March of 2006. It includes legal immigrants and most illegal immigrants. Like the Department of Homeland Security, we distinguish legal from illegal immigrants based on the socio-demographic characteristics of those who responded to the survey. By design our estimates of illegal immigration closely match those of DHS.


Luis wrote:

People who come here illegally from other countries do so at a great personal risk. Many die in the process...

Many more American citizens die (or are harmed) by illegal alien criminals than illegal aliens die crossing the desert. Watch the news. Everyday in some part of the country an illegal alien is arrested for harming an American--whether it be for murder or felony hit-and-run drunk driving. The illegal aliens in the MS-13 gang probably kill more people than die from crossing the desert.

I am not saying all illegal immigrants are criminals. Most of them are not. However, we need to know who is entering our country so that we can stop the criminals.

Above, I described some of the problems of life in Los Angeles as it relates to the presence of a large population of illegal immigrants from Latin America.

There are many things I failed to mention. One is that if you drive a car in Los Angeles and are involved in an accident, you better have uninsured motorists coverage on your policy. I was struck from behind by a woman from Mexico who did not have insurance. Her very large, old car almost totaled my car and gave me whiplash. She did not have insurance, and I never saw a license.

Also, if you sell a car you better make sure you send in a "release of liability" form to the Department of Motor Vehicles. Twice, when I sold unwanted vehicles, the cars ended up in the hands of illegal aliens. They found a way to renew the registration in the name of previous owners (me). They then drove around without a license or insurance in a vehicle registered in my name. I was alerted to the situation only after I started receiving tickets. It can be a real headache trying to get the DMV to remedy the situation.

Another issue is the hospital emergency rooms. If you are in Southern California, I hope you never have the misfortune of having to make use of emergency room services. You will find yourself waiting for hours behind illegal aliens who are using the emergency room as their primary health care service (for the flu, etc). Trauma centers have had to shut down due to the number of uninsured illegal aliens who are unable to pay.

The cost of rental property (houses & apartments) is very high due to the demand placed on the market by illegal aliens. Six men will share a tiny apartment or three families will share a small house. Parking a car on the street becomes impossible with such population density. Junk cars are parked on lawns which become trash-strewn patches of dirt occupied by chickens.

If we are to allow large numbers of immigrants to enter our country, let's due so in an orderly manner. Immigrants should be screened for potential criminal behavior and disease. There should also be minimum language requirements and a provision that welfare and other hand-outs are limited even for immigrants with anchor babies. Most importantly, employers should be required to pay a prevailing wage and benefits to immigrants and American citizens alike. This requirement would take away the incentive for the fat cats to exploit cheap immigrant labor at the expense of American workers and taxpayers.


I have one more bit of advice for those of you who live in parts of the country where the full effect of the illegal immigrant invasion has YET to be experienced. If you have kids, start saving your money for private school tuition. Once you have a substantial illegal immigrant population, the public schools will become daycare centers for gangsters and kids who can't speak English.

And, Luis, there are poor people from all over the world who would like to live in the U.S. I knew a gal from Bangalore, India who would like to live here. Why don't we have a fair system which allows people from many countries? I am sure you will not object if they are not all paisanos. Hmmm?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Pope Benedict XVI Homilies & Statements

Codex of Catholic Blogs

Orthodox Blogs

Blogs From People We Wish Were Catholic