Faith in the news

For the thinkers, theologians, philospophers.
User avatar
Wosbald
Sunday School Superintendent
Sunday School Superintendent
Posts: 993
Joined: 15 Nov 2022, 10:50
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 58 times

The Right to Migrate

Post by Wosbald »



Image
User avatar
Wosbald
Sunday School Superintendent
Sunday School Superintendent
Posts: 993
Joined: 15 Nov 2022, 10:50
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 58 times

AntiCatholicism

Post by Wosbald »

+JMJ+

Washington State House passes bill requiring clergy to violate the seal of confession

Image

Image
A priest and a penitent demonstrate how a confession is conducted at a Catholic church in Salem, Ore., in this May 3, 2019, file photo. (Credit: Chaz Muth/CNS)

NEW YORK — After the Washington State House failed to pass an amendment to a bill that would require clergy to violate the seal of confession, Bishop Thomas Daly of Spokane reminded legislators that throughout history “all” such attempts by “kings, queens, dictators, potentates, and legislators” have failed, and that even if it passed, clergy wouldn’t capitulate.

“I want to assure you that your shepherds, bishop and priests, are committed to keeping the seal of confession — even to the point of going to jail,” Daly said in an April 19 statement. “The Sacrament of Penance is sacred and will remain that way in the Diocese of Spokane.”

In March, the Washington Senate passed the bill, SB 5280, that would make clergy mandated reporters, or people required by law to report suspected instances of child abuse or neglect. The bill, which passed unanimously, included an exemption for clergy-penitent privilege.

The bill then went to the Washington House for a vote. However, the House added an amendment to the Senate version that removed the clergy-penitent exemption. That version of the bill passed the House on April 11. The vote was 75–20.

The House vote sent the bill back to the Senate to approve the amendment, which it rejected. The House now has until the end of the week, when the legislative session ends, to re-vote.

The House has a few options: It could remove the amendment and pass the bill as it was written by the Senate; remove the amendment, but pass the bill with new conditions that the Senate would have then have to vote on; or keep the amendment and ask the Senate to reconsider.

Archbishop Paul Etienne of Seattle said the Washington bishops support the Senate version of the bill that has the exemption for clergy-penitent privilege.

“The Catholic Church already deems priests as mandatory reporters. The bishops support this aspect of the bill, with one exception — when individuals are confessing their sins during the sacrament of reconciliation,” Etienne said in an April 19 statement.

“The confidentiality of the sacrament must be preserved so that individuals are able to freely unburden their souls,” Etienne continued. “This religious liberty must be protected, as it has been historically in our country.”

[…]

Etienne said removing the exemption would be an “unconstitutional violation of civil liberties.”

“It would violate the First Amendment’s Free Exercise clause because it would threaten priests with legal sanctions unless they violate their religious vows,” Etienne explained. “The bill attempts to interfere with our Catholic worship and unfairly targets religious liberty, both of which are bad precedents.”

Washington Democratic Senator Noel Frame said it’s about child protection, saying “they need to know the adults in their life will do something.”

Daly and Etienne both acknowledged the church’s history of clergy sex, but highlighted the reforms that have been implemented since the U.S. Catholic Church established the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People in 2002, and its zero-tolerance policy.

“Our goal is to do everything within our power to keep your children safe while we attempt to lead them to know and love Jesus Christ who commanded, ‘let the children come to me and do not hinder them,” Daly said.


Image
User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2725
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 232 times
Been thanked: 372 times

The Right to Migrate

Post by Del »

Poll Finds Human Trafficking Top Concern In Border Crisis

The Trafalgar Group‘s survey, released as officials brace for a migrant surge should the Trump-era Title 42 policy credited with blocking millions of crossings expire next month, asked likely general election voters to pick from a handful of issues stemming from the “southern border crisis” that concern them the most.

Top of the list, with 35.1% of voters, was human trafficking of women and children. In second place were 26.6% of respondents picking illegal border crossers or asylum seekers being released into the U.S. before their cases are reviewed.

After that, 14.8% said illegal border crossers with ties to international terrorist organizations, followed by 14.1% saying they are most concerned about the flow of fentanyl and other dangerous drugs. The remaining 9.4% said none of the above.
America welcomes immigrants. We are perhaps the most welcoming nation in the developed world. Even people who support a border wall and border security are not opposed to welcoming immigrants.

It's the failure to secure safety and security for the immigrants that troubles us, as Biden's policies increase the danger and drugs and lawlessness for everyone in America. But for myself and many others, we are disgusted that the cartels have been allowed to create an industrial trade in sex slaves.
User avatar
Wosbald
Sunday School Superintendent
Sunday School Superintendent
Posts: 993
Joined: 15 Nov 2022, 10:50
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 58 times

The Right to Migrate

Post by Wosbald »

+JMJ+

U.S. bishops urge officials to tackle root causes of border crisis

Image

Image
Migrants march to Huehuetan, Chiapas state, Mexico, Monday, April 24, 2023. About 3,000 migrants began walking before dawn for a second day of protest march demanding the end of detention centers like the one that caught fire last month, killing 40 migrants. (Credit: Edgar H. Clemente/AP)

NEW YORK — With policy changes at the U.S.–Mexico border on the horizon, Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso acknowledged on April 24 that there remains uncertainty around what will happen, but a “significant” migration surge is likely, and help is welcome.

“We’re about to perhaps face a significant surge in people coming across the border,” said Seitz, referring to May 11 when Title 42 will end. “We don’t know exactly what is going to happen then, but we’d love to have some reinforcements because we’re running shelters and we depend on volunteers for that.”

Seitz made the comments at a dialogue hosted by the Georgetown Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life, where panelists analyzed the nation’s migration crisis.

Seitz, who is also chair of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Migration, says the heart of the problem is the view that the problem is the border itself, as opposed to the border being viewed as a symptom of why people are arriving there in the first place.

He likened treating immigration as a border problem to treating cancer with aspirin.

“It doesn’t fix things to control the border, but what we need to do is not simply think about immigrants as a problem and a threat, we need to think about why they are coming,” Seitz said. “Trust that underlying the situations are almost exclusively violence and its threats, and the instability caused by that violence and its economic problems caused by that instability.”

“Immigration will not be fixed by simply stopping people or sending them back,” Seitz continued. “Immigration issues will be allowed to become a more orderly, normal human process if we deal with the root causes of them in the sending countries. And if we in this country begin to see immigrants as not a threat, but rather as people who are in need, who deserve our assistance because of their human struggle.”

Through the two-plus years of Biden administration, it has largely taken a deterrent approach to migration, utilizing policies like Title 42 — a controversial Trump-era measure that allows the immediate expulsion of immigrants. The result has been record migration at the southern border.

[…]

Seitz and others have also lamented the approach the Biden administration has elected to take once Title 42 ends. One aspect of the plan that will go into effect is a proposed two-year rule that will presume immigrants are ineligible for asylum if they enter the country unlawfully. It would allow for the rapid deportation of any immigrants who fail to utilize a legal pathway to enter the U.S., or who don’t seek asylum or other protection in a country through which they traveled.

The policy is another step further away from what President Joe Biden campaigned on, which was a more humane immigration system different from that under President Donald Trump.

Andrea Flores, chief counsel to Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) who worked on immigration policy in both the Biden and Obama administrations, said the direction the Biden administration has taken on immigration “very disappointing.” The proposed transit rule in particular, she said, is “very extreme.”

“An asylum ban is seen as a shift to the middle on immigration … this is a very extreme step that the U.S. is taking that is going to inspire other countries to do similar asylum bans,” Flores said.

Flores put the onus on leaders of both parties for why the nation’s immigration system has become what it has, noting that the conversation is too focused on the numbers at the border.

“Our solutions are to the high border numbers that you see. Our solutions are not about any of the individualized reasons why people are coming to our borders,” Flores said. “It’s something I’d like to see more of from leaders on both sides.”

Camilo Montoya-Galvez, an immigration reporter with CBS News, noted that part of the problem is the distance between the priorities of political leaders in each party. Democrats, he said, are focused on helping the migrants who have been in the U.S. for years. Meanwhile, Republicans are focused on tougher policies at the border, and limiting asylum.

“Both parties are unwilling, or unable, in many cases to make hard and tough concessions,” he said.

There are problems for migrants in the U.S., as well. Particularly with the asylum processing backlog. Data from TRAC Immigration, an online database run by Syracuse University that tracks the asylum processing backlog, shows that as of March 2023 the average days’ wait until a migrant gets an asylum hearing in immigration court is 1,525, or about four years.

To take it a step further, Beatriz Ortiz, an immigration staff attorney at Ayuda — a non-profit that facilitates the provision of direct legal, social and language services to immigrants — said that it sometimes takes her nine months after an application is filed to get a receipt from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

“It’s unbelievable,” Ortiz said, adding that the delay often impacts migrants’ ability to get renewals on employment authorizations. “You have people that have the ability to work legally in the United States, and they are losing their jobs, and they are losing the ability to support themselves.”

In closing remarks, Seitz said there’s one simple thing that all people can do to change the conversation around migration in the U.S.: Meet an immigrant.

“If you want to be strengthened and hope, meet an immigrant because they will show you just how grace can work in a person’s life,” Seitz said. “From a non-faith perspective you’ll find it in them, incredible faith.”


Image
User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2725
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 232 times
Been thanked: 372 times

The Right to Migrate

Post by Del »

Wosbald wrote: 26 Apr 2023, 13:30 +JMJ+

U.S. bishops urge officials to tackle root causes of border crisis

Image

Image
Migrants march to Huehuetan, Chiapas state, Mexico, Monday, April 24, 2023. About 3,000 migrants began walking before dawn for a second day of protest march demanding the end of detention centers like the one that caught fire last month, killing 40 migrants. (Credit: Edgar H. Clemente/AP)

NEW YORK — With policy changes at the U.S.–Mexico border on the horizon, Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso acknowledged on April 24 that there remains uncertainty around what will happen, but a “significant” migration surge is likely, and help is welcome.

“We’re about to perhaps face a significant surge in people coming across the border,” said Seitz, referring to May 11 when Title 42 will end. “We don’t know exactly what is going to happen then, but we’d love to have some reinforcements because we’re running shelters and we depend on volunteers for that.”

Seitz made the comments at a dialogue hosted by the Georgetown Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life, where panelists analyzed the nation’s migration crisis.

Seitz, who is also chair of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Migration, says the heart of the problem is the view that the problem is the border itself, as opposed to the border being viewed as a symptom of why people are arriving there in the first place.

He likened treating immigration as a border problem to treating cancer with aspirin.

“It doesn’t fix things to control the border, but what we need to do is not simply think about immigrants as a problem and a threat, we need to think about why they are coming,” Seitz said. “Trust that underlying the situations are almost exclusively violence and its threats, and the instability caused by that violence and its economic problems caused by that instability.”

“Immigration will not be fixed by simply stopping people or sending them back,” Seitz continued. “Immigration issues will be allowed to become a more orderly, normal human process if we deal with the root causes of them in the sending countries. And if we in this country begin to see immigrants as not a threat, but rather as people who are in need, who deserve our assistance because of their human struggle.”

Through the two-plus years of Biden administration, it has largely taken a deterrent approach to migration, utilizing policies like Title 42 — a controversial Trump-era measure that allows the immediate expulsion of immigrants. The result has been record migration at the southern border.

[…]

Seitz and others have also lamented the approach the Biden administration has elected to take once Title 42 ends. One aspect of the plan that will go into effect is a proposed two-year rule that will presume immigrants are ineligible for asylum if they enter the country unlawfully. It would allow for the rapid deportation of any immigrants who fail to utilize a legal pathway to enter the U.S., or who don’t seek asylum or other protection in a country through which they traveled.

The policy is another step further away from what President Joe Biden campaigned on, which was a more humane immigration system different from that under President Donald Trump.

Andrea Flores, chief counsel to Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) who worked on immigration policy in both the Biden and Obama administrations, said the direction the Biden administration has taken on immigration “very disappointing.” The proposed transit rule in particular, she said, is “very extreme.”

“An asylum ban is seen as a shift to the middle on immigration … this is a very extreme step that the U.S. is taking that is going to inspire other countries to do similar asylum bans,” Flores said.

Flores put the onus on leaders of both parties for why the nation’s immigration system has become what it has, noting that the conversation is too focused on the numbers at the border.

“Our solutions are to the high border numbers that you see. Our solutions are not about any of the individualized reasons why people are coming to our borders,” Flores said. “It’s something I’d like to see more of from leaders on both sides.”

Camilo Montoya-Galvez, an immigration reporter with CBS News, noted that part of the problem is the distance between the priorities of political leaders in each party. Democrats, he said, are focused on helping the migrants who have been in the U.S. for years. Meanwhile, Republicans are focused on tougher policies at the border, and limiting asylum.

“Both parties are unwilling, or unable, in many cases to make hard and tough concessions,” he said.

There are problems for migrants in the U.S., as well. Particularly with the asylum processing backlog. Data from TRAC Immigration, an online database run by Syracuse University that tracks the asylum processing backlog, shows that as of March 2023 the average days’ wait until a migrant gets an asylum hearing in immigration court is 1,525, or about four years.

To take it a step further, Beatriz Ortiz, an immigration staff attorney at Ayuda — a non-profit that facilitates the provision of direct legal, social and language services to immigrants — said that it sometimes takes her nine months after an application is filed to get a receipt from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

“It’s unbelievable,” Ortiz said, adding that the delay often impacts migrants’ ability to get renewals on employment authorizations. “You have people that have the ability to work legally in the United States, and they are losing their jobs, and they are losing the ability to support themselves.”

In closing remarks, Seitz said there’s one simple thing that all people can do to change the conversation around migration in the U.S.: Meet an immigrant.

“If you want to be strengthened and hope, meet an immigrant because they will show you just how grace can work in a person’s life,” Seitz said. “From a non-faith perspective you’ll find it in them, incredible faith.”
This is easy. The root causes of migration are gang violence and lawless cartels in the migrants' homelands.

The root cause of our border crisis is that Biden refuses to defend our border with adequate staff, enforce our immigration laws, or staff the immigration services to handle the numbers of people that the cartels let through. The results are miserable for the migrants.

Biden could easily establish an asylum policy that is processed at the local embassy. Migrants could get on a plane and land in America for establishment with a sponsor -- for significantly less money than the cartels extort from families. Avoid all those rapes and sex/slave trafficking, as well. Immigrant families could be placed into jobs and housing. Basically, just do what Trump wanted to do.... although he got no cooperation from Republicans or Democrats in Congress.

Biden could do these things, and end the migrant crisis. He's already blatantly ignoring Congress.... just ignore them in a good way instead.
User avatar
Wosbald
Sunday School Superintendent
Sunday School Superintendent
Posts: 993
Joined: 15 Nov 2022, 10:50
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 58 times

The Right to Migrate

Post by Wosbald »



Image
User avatar
Wosbald
Sunday School Superintendent
Sunday School Superintendent
Posts: 993
Joined: 15 Nov 2022, 10:50
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 58 times

The Right to Migrate

Post by Wosbald »

+JMJ+

US bishops oppose GOP-backed ‘Secure the Border Act’

Image

Image
President Joe Biden speaks during a meeting with his “Investing in America Cabinet,” in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, Friday, May 5, 2023, in Washington. Biden would veto a House GOP bill that aims to restrict asylum, build more border wall and cut a program that allows migrants a chance to stay in the U.S. lawfully for two years, an administration official said Monday, May 8. (Credit: Evan Vucci, AP File)

NEW YORK — With the House of Representatives set to vote on sweeping immigration legislation, the U.S. Bishops’ Conference migration chair has urged legislators to oppose it, deeming it incompatible with Catholic social teaching and the nation’s commitment to humanitarian protection.

Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso said in a letter to Congress that he doesn’t question the intentions of lawmakers who seek to secure the border or to discount the challenges that exist there, but asserted that the bill “would fundamentally weaken our nation’s decades-long commitment to humanitarian protection.”

“This legislation contains such a combination of harmful measures that we believe its passage, on the whole, is beyond justification,” said Seitz, who leads the USCCB Committee on Migration.

H.R. 2, the “Secure the Border Act,” was introduced by Representative Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla, earlier this month, and has garnered the support of top lawmakers in the GOP-controlled House, as the nation grapples with an unprecedented immigration crisis at the southern border.

The bill includes provisions to limit asylum opportunities for migrants who unlawfully enter the country, limit funding to certain programs and the governments’ partnership with nongovernmental organizations, restrict the use of parole to help especially vulnerable populations, and expedite border wall construction.

[…]

The bill goes against the kind of immigration policies the U.S. bishops have called for, mainly long-term measures that address root causes of why people flee their home countries.

Chief among Seitz’s criticisms of the legislation is the fact that the legislation would subject unaccompanied minors and families with children to indefinite detention by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). It would also subject unaccompanied minors to an expedited screening and for those deemed eligible at the time, appearance before an immigration judge within 14 days, which Seitz said doesn’t give minors “meaningful” access to legal counsel or a child advocate. A government-funded representation program would be abolished, as well.

Seitz further took issue with how the bill would limit asylum. It would eliminate the asylum possibility for anyone who enters the U.S. in between ports of entry with no exceptions, and in general would make it more difficult for anyone to claim asylum at a port of entry. It would attach a $50 fee for each asylum application without the possibility of a waiver.

Another point of contention is a measure that would require eligible asylum seekers to reapply for employment authorization every six months, which could compound an already years-long backlog on the employment reauthorization process.

Seitz also fears that vague language in a provision that would prevent DHS funding to any nongovernmental organization that is deemed to facilitate unlawful entry, or provide a myriad of services to migrants — including transportation, lodging, and legal services — could have an outsized effect on Catholic organizations that are vital to the nation’s migration response.

Further, the bill would restrict the use of parole, which has been a cornerstone of the Biden administration’s border policy to date, providing the opportunity for highly vulnerable migrants from certain countries to live and work in the U.S. for a period of two years.

Instead of these types of measures, Seitz encouraged Congress to focus on long term solutions. Congress hasn’t passed a substantial immigration reform bill since the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act.

“We take this moment to reiterate that ‘no combination of legal pathways or harsh enforcement measures will suffice to meet the complex challenge of forced migration facing our country and hemisphere,” Seitz said.

“Only through a long-term commitment to addressing root causes and promoting integral human development throughout the Americas, combined with an overhaul of our immigration system, will we be able to achieve the conditions necessary to sustainably reduce irregular migration.”

“We urge you to oppose the passage of H.R. 2 and to support drafting bipartisan legislation that is more in keeping with our nation’s rich tradition of welcome,” he continued.


Image
User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2725
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 232 times
Been thanked: 372 times

Faith in the news

Post by Del »

I don't mind a guy who is fixated on immigration policy and border security. Just please stop pretending that this thread is about "faith."

Only the OP can change the title.
User avatar
tuttle
Sunday School Teacher
Sunday School Teacher
Posts: 424
Joined: 08 Apr 2022, 05:21
Location: Middle-west
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 90 times
Contact:

Faith in the news

Post by tuttle »

Nearly all the beats wozzy lays down in this thread are from the exact same drum all the progressive protestants beat incessantly.

I'm NOT saying wozzy is on par with lefty protestantism but I am saying that it more or less falls on deaf ears. Maybe he's just using this thread to keep track for himself, like a journal. Or since he doesn't really share his own thoughts... maybe more like a peg board.
"tuttle isn't saved" - Legion
User avatar
Wosbald
Sunday School Superintendent
Sunday School Superintendent
Posts: 993
Joined: 15 Nov 2022, 10:50
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Faith in the news

Post by Wosbald »

+JMJ+
tuttle wrote: 12 May 2023, 05:39 Nearly all the beats wozzy lays down in this thread are from the exact same drum all the progressive protestants beat incessantly.

I'm NOT saying wozzy is on par with lefty protestantism …
Not sure if I'm bein' a buttinsky into your convo with Del, but I think it really shouldn't be a surprise if Catholic Faith's self-styled "Fullness of Truth" resonates more with "Lefty Protestantism" on some issues and with "Righty Protestantism" on others. Rather, it seems like what one should expect.

Now, the preponderance of news on these issues may currently favor the "Lefty Protestant" squint, but that's likely due to the ascendency of Right-Fascism putting these historically Leftish issues under pressure.

OTOH, all that could change overnight if a rise in Left-Fascism (e.g. Fascistic Dems like RFK Jr. or Marianne Williamson) started dictating the convo.

Or we could see a worst-case scenario of a Bellum Omnium Contra Omnes ("war of all-against-all") — a Nationwide Flamewar between avatars of Right- & Left-Fascism overheating the melting-pot of American life into one, big, confusing, Babylonian stew.

:violence-rapidfire: :violence-glob:


Image
Post Reply