News

Faith leaders denounce Trump proclamation denying asylum outside border crossings

Members of a U.S.-bound migrant caravan stand on a road after federal police briefly blocked their way outside the town of Arriaga, Mexico, on Oct. 27, 2018. Hundreds of Mexican federal officers carrying plastic shields had blocked the caravan from advancing toward the United States after several thousand of the migrants turned down the chance to apply for refugee status and obtain a Mexican offer of benefits. (AP Photo/Rodrigo Abd)

(RNS) — President Trump signed a proclamation Friday (Nov. 9) barring anyone who enters the United States outside of official border crossings from applying for asylum in the country.

Trump hinted at such plans before the midterms, while discussing a caravan of would-be asylum seekers traveling through Central America toward the United States. Since the late 1960s, the U.S. has allowed people fleeing persecution in their home countries to apply for sanctuary anywhere in the U.S., not just at official ports of entry.

Religious support for the proclamation did not immediately fill inboxes and social media timelines.

Opposition started even before the rules were made official.

Earlier this week, 715 leaders and organizations from many different religious traditions signed onto a letter delivered to Congress opposing the president’s plans, affirming the right to seek asylum and expressing “unequivocal support for the caravan of people seeking protection from violence in Central America.”

Signers included two of the six faith-based agencies contracted with the U.S. government to resettle refugees: Church World Service and Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service. They also included the Franciscan Action Network, the Friends Committee on National Legislation (Quakers), the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, United Sikhs and the United Methodist Church’s General Board of Church and Society.

Last week, the Evangelical Immigration Table also published a letter encouraging churches to “respond with Christ-like love to the vulnerable families and individuals who form this caravan.” It urged the U.S. government to “respect and enforce our laws” allowing people to apply for asylum, though it acknowledged not all who apply may qualify for that status.

The evangelical Christian group includes World Relief, another faith-based refugee resettlement agency; the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities; the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention; Korean Churches for Community Development/Faith and Community Empowerment; the National Association of Evangelicals; and the Wesleyan Church.

Here are several more responses from religious leaders and organizations.

Church World Service

CWS, which had organized the letter to Congress earlier this week, also issued a statement Friday denouncing the Trump administration’s asylum ban as “cruel, unnecessary, and illegal.”

“As our government abandons these families at their time of greatest need, CWS and people of faith across our nation will not desert them. We will continue to provide support and resources for migrant families on both sides of the border, while advocating for a swift reversal of these dangerous policies.”

Melanie Nezer, senior vice president for public affairs at HIAS

“Many of the men, women, and children arriving at our Southern border are fleeing unimaginable violence. The U.S. has the capacity and a moral obligation to consider the claims of those arriving at our border. The U.S. has been processing asylum claims for decades. These individuals deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, and should have their claims heard.”

Scott Arbeiter, president of World Relief

“For decades, World Relief has partnered with local churches to assist persecuted people in rebuilding their lives in the United States. We stand ready to do so now, and are deeply troubled by the news that our government may disregard our laws and restrict the opportunity to request asylum.”

Kay Bellor, vice president for programs at Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service

“Our faith teaches us to love our neighbor, and our common values inspire us to open our doors to those seeking refuge. As long as violence and repression persist in Honduras and other countries, people will continue to flee to safety. Our call is to welcome them and treat them with respect and dignity once they arrive.”

Farhana Khera, executive director of Muslim Advocates

“Despite what President Trump claims, this is neither about national security nor resources. Just as with the Muslim Ban, this is about an ongoing attack on immigrants and communities of color. The asylum ban cruelly and illegally closes our nation’s doors to those in need for no factual reason. Our country has national and international legal obligations to provide refuge to those most in need. No President — not even Trump — can ignore legal asylum obligations on a whim or by executive fiat.”

Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism

Pesner released a statement in late October on behalf of the Union for Reform Judaism, the Central Conference of American Rabbis and the wider Reform Movement, responding to the plans Trump then was considering. The Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism shared his statement again after those plans were made official, calling the denial of asylum seekers “a grave moral failing.”

“From our earliest days as a people fleeing biblical Egypt, we know what it means to search for safety and security. Many of those who are currently traveling through Central America and Mexico with the goal of reaching the U.S. are fleeing devastating economic, social, and political circumstances. They need compassion and humanitarian aid. Within that group there may also be individuals whose circumstances are such that they meet the international standards required to be granted asylum; they must be allowed to make their case.”

The Rev. Jennifer Butler, CEO of Faith in Public Life

“President Trump’s new executive order is a violation of national and international law. More importantly, it is a violation of many faith traditions, which instruct us to welcome the stranger and defend the vulnerable. To deny children and families seeking safety a fair chance for security is sin. As a nation we have a moral responsibility to protect those in fear of their life. As a pastor, I call on the Trump administration to repent and reverse this wicked decision.”

About the author

Emily McFarlan Miller

Emily McFarlan Miller is a national reporter for RNS based in Chicago. She covers evangelical and mainline Protestant Christianity.

95 Comments

Click here to post a comment

  • Well gee whiz; there ya have it. The United States is now accepting “refugees” – just proceed to an official point of entry.
    Now all the poor refugees won’t have to climb fences, crawl through tunnels, face the open desert with their human Coyote or take the chance of baking to death in the back of a semi-trailer.
    God bless Donald Trump.

  • I encourage everyone to study the recent experience of Italy and other European nations before deciding how to respond to this wave of immigrants. The initiative of the Italian government to have the navy rescue any and all refugee vessels (“Mare Nostrum”) resulted in 190,000 people being received, although Italy had neither the facilities to process them all nor a coherent plan for their socialization into Italian society, which is their only possible residence according to the Dublin Accords. Italian schools are merit-based, so tens of thousands of children can’t gain access until they first learn the language, then catch up to a system that requires a strong background in math and science. Like many European borders, Italy’s is now squeezed tight, and tomorrow’s refugees will have to seek asylum elsewhere.

  • Monica, what is the expectation in Italy and Europe for assimilation into the host country? Where have you seen this succeed or not?

  • These organizations have so much experience in this area, they know so much more than the president could ever know, or want to know. He has no intellectual curiosity. The sad thing is he is peddling these lies to stir up hate against groups of people, fellow human beings. How sick is that? The process is very clear. It is quite difficult be granted asylum in the US.

  • These faith leaders and their organizations do quite a bit for refugees. Of course, Trump’s plan benefits private corporations. Nothing could go wrong there! LOL.

  • No, if they’re going to advise the USA to open its borders, they’re obliged to take responsibility for the consequences.

    The asylum statute is a complete piece of garbage, and that was pointed out when it was passed and multiple times since.

    At the very least any nation should be allowed to control entry, and this executive order accomplishes that.

  • Is there no end to lies, lies and lies from TrumpHaters?! Here’s one more straight, and with a straight face, from this article:

    “Since the late 1960s, the U.S. has allowed … members of a U.S.-bound migrant caravan … to apply for sanctuary”!

    ‘Yo Trump, dude, lemme hear you sic ’em, all these “faith-base[less] agencies”, with your line, man: “You’re Fired!”

  • 7,000 + 5,000 + 1,800 + 1,500 people making up this “U.S.-bound migrant caravan” have been politically weaponized. Sole target? U.S. President Donald Trump. And that’s the only reason you’re one Happy American today.

  • 7,000 + 5,000 + 1,800 + 1,500. That’s how many illegal aliens about to crash The American Party. 2 of them to go to 1 one deluxe hotel room with frameless glass shower. So that’s like 4 Las Vegas hotels all chartered up.

    America, America, what has become of you?!

  • The caravan occurs almost yearly. Has nothing to do with “Trump”. He honestly is not that important. Not everything is about him. Why are you a miserable unhappy American?

  • They are not going to advise the USA to open its borders anymore than it already does. The asylum state is a piece of garbage? How so? (I suspect you know nothing actually about the asylum process…)

    Every nation should be allowed to control entry. We have a very good system of doing that. For instance, the people in this caravan want to seek asylum. They would actually make sure to go and turn themselves in to an official so they can undergo the process of seeking asylum and/or refugee status. This order is posturing and appealing to worst among us in the country.

  • Of course they are.

    What they’re advocating is that any lawbreaker who bypasses the border checkpoints by hook, by crook, or by mob should be treated the same as people who show up at a border checkpoint and are processed lawfully.

    Asylum is provided under the United States Refugee Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-212). Because it so vague, one administrative judge’s asylum is another judge’s deportation. The amount of litigation has completely clogged the system since, rather than people fleeing actual repression (Jews in the Soviet Union, Christians in Afghanistan under the Taliban), it is being used to treat women whose husbands beat them as refugees.

    In addition it has proven the perfect defense for illegal entry since all the illegal has to do is file for asylum, get put in the queue, and then disappear into the population.

    The solution is a defendable border, illegal entry a bar to seeking “asylum”, and sufficient manpower in the Border Patrol and adjudication process to make it work.

    The last administration did the opposite.

  • The economy of the US is 10X the economy of Italy. The refugee issue has nothing to do with our ability to absorb refugees. The problem is that we cannot Make America White Again if we let brown people in.

  • According to the Dublin Accords, refugees must remain in the country that received them, without passing through to other countries. If they try to move, they’re deported back to the first Eu country they entered, which is often Italy or Greece, two of the countries with the worst welfare provisions. So they face lots of obstacles to begin with, plus the challenge of learning the language and catching up with a highly competitive school system. Germany has made it work, although there’s been a lot of pushback there and in most receiving countries.
    I should say this is not a perfect analogy to the US situation, but it’s something any country in its right mind should consider before granting asylum. If catch-and-release is still the practice to any extent, then I don’t think the process is fair either to the immigrants or to the people of the nation.

  • The economy, in the narrow sense, is only one part of a culture’s ability to absorb/receive refugees. If the refugees are essentially lost to the system after arrival, they’re not being absorbed/assimilated as much as they’re being hidden and denied benefits, as well as basic rights.

  • We have been absorbing refugees in very large numbers for hundreds of years. It can be done. But all these brown people coming across the border (or wanting to) raises the white paranoia stress level, which was already high because of That Black President.

  • GOTTA READ BETWEEN THE LINES, ‘YO! Like this. Watch & learn.

    “‘There were ‘criminals and unknown Middle Easterners’ in the caravan’ … ‘The president of Honduras [reported] that the caravan was organized by leftist organizations, political activists within Honduras, and he said it was being funded by outside groups, and even from Venezuela … This is not a spontaneous caravan of vulnerable people.’ … The Department of Homeland … ‘confirmed’ that within the caravan are people who are ‘gang members or have significant criminal histories’ … Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida wondered whether George Soros … was behind the migrant caravan.”

    Source: Adam Serwer, “Trump’s Caravan Hysteria Led to This: The president and his supporters insisted that several thousand Honduran migrants were a looming menace – and the Pittsburgh gunman took that seriously”, The Atlantic, October 28, 2018.

  • GOTTA READ THIS TOO BETWEEN THE LINES, ‘YO! Like this. Watch & learn again.

    “There are over 270 individuals along the caravan route that have criminal histories, including known gang membership. On October 29, the Mexican ambassador to the U.S. described some of the caravan members as ‘very violent:’ ‘Unfortunately, some of the people in the caravan have been very violent against authority, even though they have offered the possibility of entering in compliance with immigration law and refugee status.’ On October 30, Mexico’s Interior Minister Navarrete Prida speaking on Radio Enfoque (Focus) 100.1 FM, confirmed that some criminal groups have infiltrated the caravan: ‘I have videos from Guatemala that show men dressed in identical clothing, sporting the same haircuts, handing out money to women to persuade them to move to the front of the caravan … We know, for a fact, that some members of the caravan threatened [Mexican] Migration Institute personnel and we have images showing many of them preparing Molotov cocktails.'”

    Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, November 1, 2018, “Myth vs. Fact: Caravan”.

  • Germany has experienced an increase in crime and other problems “mak(ing) it work”, and it has effectively ended Angela Dorothea Merkel’s political career.

    Europe has also found that Islamic radicals infiltrated the ranks of refugees.

    In addition there at least a pretense of actual refugee status due to open and sustained warfare in the countries of origin, and mass murder of civilians due to ethnic and religious differences.

    Those conditions are NOT present south of the American border.

  • We have not been absorbing refugees in very large numbers for hundreds of years.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_immigration_to_the_United_States#Immigration_summary_since_1830

    There was an initial large influx of English-speaking immigrants prior to the founding of the United States.

    In the 19th century while immigration was still in the hands of the states there was a second large wave of German-speaking immigrants, largely a result of political unrest in the German-speaking lands.

    As a percentage of its population, the United States has accepted a fairly constant number of immigrants since 1890. A large percentage of these have been from Mexico, the Philippines, China, and Vietnam – hardly a lily white immigration policy.

    Immigration laws have been fiercely debated leading to laws which reflect a democratic consensus reflecting the views of the majority at various point in our history.

    EVERY group – German, Catholics, Irish, Eastern Europeans – has experienced pushback from the existing population.

    What differs here are the following:

    – That Black President took upon himself to effectively modify the immigration laws by edict, creating significant pushback from Americans who believe in the rule of law.

    – Activist judges, particularly in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, have asserted authority to second guess the Executive Branch and reformulate and dictate immigration policy and enforcement.

    – A variety of groups, such as those discussed in the article, have proclaimed that the democratic process used in the past should be scrapped in favor of a nebulous “Christ-like love to the vulnerable families and individuals” which they have completely unable to articulate into any coherent program which could be enacted and enforced.

    – And of course the raising of specious side issues such as the one you raised in your comment.

    That ” these brown people coming across the border (or wanting to) raises the white paranoia stress level, which was already high because of That Black President” is simple hogwash.

  • Were Plymouth and Jamestown the original “official points of entry”? Do we have the original refugee applications? In the Smithsonian or the Library of Congress?

  • You might actually read the law and the cases arising from it, then acquaint yourself with the increasing backlog in the courts whose job it is to adjudicate cases arising from it due to the complete lack of a clear definition within the law of what constitutes a refugee.

    The current situation stems from a bad “feel good” law passed during Jimmy Carter’s Administration.

  • I don’t think that desperate people are worried about breaking our immigration laws. Are there any news reports on what the people in the caravan hope to achieve? I doubt if they care about strengthening the Democrats’ agenda. The media is so fixated on whomping Trump about this, that they seem to be missing the causes of this migration. Isn’t the Christian thing to do, to go out and talk to them? Do they have a leader? We need to take a note out of St. Leo the Great’s book. Today is his feast day. He is purported to have turned back Atilla the Hun and his followers from Rome. Atilla obviously was not interested in making a better life in a new land. But the negotiations appeared to have worked,

  • Since at the time of Plymouth and Jamestown what was then America was a British colony, citizens of England did not enter “official points of entry”.

    In the early United States the states themselves governed immigration.

    So, no official points of entry and no refugee applications.

  • “You might actually read the law and the cases arising from it, then acquaint yourself with the increasing backlog in the courts whose job it is to adjudicate cases arising from it due to the complete lack of a clear definition within the law of what constitutes a refugee.”

    Have done such an exercise. It bears little, if at all, on our current discussion here….

  • Thank you for the article link. It further served to remind me of some things I have been reading about Abraham Lincoln. When he was in the US Congress, he voted against President Polk’s attempts to claim for slavery the north bank of the Rio Grande, rather than making a boundary line on the watershed (Lord Charnwood, Abraham Lincoln). Lincoln continually voted for the Wilmot Proviso, which was always voted down. Later this biography tells of the machinations to make California a slave state, in spite of the inhabitants’ desire to enter as a free state.

  • Not sure why one needs to “read between the lines.” It is pretty explicit and clear. So what? Those 270 individuals won’t get asylum.

  • https://www.archivesfoundation.org/documents/refugee-act-1980/

    “The Act also changed the definition of ‘refugee’ to a person with a ‘well-founded fear of persecution’ ….'”.

    Of course it bears on our current discussion:

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/religionnews/religious_leaders_denounce_trump_proclamation_denying_asylum_outside_border_crossings/#comment-4187614321

    “The amount of litigation has completely clogged the system since, rather than people fleeing actual repression (Jews in the Soviet Union, Christians in Afghanistan under the Taliban), it is being used to treat women whose husbands beat them as refugees.”

    I do believe you’re blowing smoke in my direction.

  • It is fascinating you choose Christians in Afghanistan as an example. I wonder if you realize there are a lot of Afghan refugees who are actually Muslim? Just saying.

    The law does not grant asylum to and treat “women whose husbands beat them as refugees.” I am not blowing smoke. Just trying to speak factually about this situation and the asylum/refugee process in general. Now I see it is impossible for you to do so. UGH!

  • Since discussions about immigration on RNS typically demonstrate a near total lack of knowledge about American history, it’s worth describing what the Wilmot Proviso was.

    It was a proposal to prohibit slavery in the territory acquired by the United States at the conclusion of the Mexican War.

    In 1846, David Wilmot – a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives from Pennsylvania, attached a proviso to an appropriations bill to pay Mexico for land that the United States had seized as a result of the Mexican War. The Wilmot Proviso would have prevented slavery’s expansion into any of this new territory. The House of Representatives approved the appropriations bill and the proviso on August 8, 1846, but the Senate adjourned before it could debate the bill. The House adopted the bill and the proviso in its next session. On February 1, 1847, the Senate approved the bill but rejected the proviso. As a result, the proviso never went into effect.

    The House provides each state representatives based on that state’s population, and the North had more people than the South.

    In the Senate there were an equal number of slave and free states. With each state was entitled to two senators, and the vote along regional lines, a bill could not be approved.

  • IF you spoke factually about this situation, AND you were in favor of a legislated solution to it, THEN you would immediately address YOUR solutions to the huge backlog of pending asylum cases, an explanation of how being afraid of spousal abuse constitutes a “well-founded fear of persecution” (I have refrained from citing actual cases while you continue to avoid substantive responses), or living in country with a poor economy thanks to bad leadership constitutes the same.

    Instead I read vague and unsupported conclusions.

    We need a legislated solution to the situation. That will require:

    – a clear concrete black and white definition of who it is that qualifies for “asylum”;

    – sufficient resources to actually process those seeking asylum;

    – a border sufficiently non-porous to ensure that those seeking asylum are processed through an actual staffed border crossing;

    – immediate adjudication of all pending asylum claims;

    – penalties for illegal entry into the United States which are sufficiently onerous as to make it undesirable.

    Pious platitudes and vague assurances that “(w)e have a very good system of doing that” – which we demonstrably do not – no longer cut it.

  • “Read Between The Lines”: For The In-Between Mainstream News Media, Fake News, and Conspiracy Theory.

    You just gotta.

    Trust noone.

    Only trust God & Jesus.

  • Faith Leaders

    The HEAP — “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables…” Timothy

  • I’ve got 1 better (though much worse, actually.) Call it “Neo-Testamentary Conspiracy Theory” (patent pending)! Here you go:

    Acts 23:12 – “When it was day, [they] formed a conspiracy [συστροφὴν – systropheen – a twisting get-together, hence a riotous concourse or conspiracy] and bound themselves under an oath, saying that they would neither eat nor drink until they had killed Paul.”

  • This “caravan” pales in comparison to the refugee waves the US has taken in before. The US has a much longer history of integrating refugees than any developed nation. The only reason this one is special is we have a white supremacist president looking to use this group to shore up support with panic and incitement to violence

  • Quotemining is the tactic of lying sacks of crap.

    No link is given to the full story because its point was that the statements you are quoting are UNTRUE and not believed by the author.

  • CORRECTION: “Quotemining” was invented by Evolutionists.

    You’re an Evolutionist, so you should already know that, to here quote mine Conservapedia: The Trustworthy Encyclopedia:

    “Quote mining is a term typically used by evolutionists to attempt to justify a knee-jerk allegation made by an evolutionist that a quote of a prominent evolutionist admitting one or more of the many weaknesses of the evolutionary paradigm is being taken out of context when in most cases it is certainly not. This reflexive denialism and/or obfuscation occurs because Darwinism is an errant religion often practiced by dogmatists and it is not science. The Darwinist and atheist philosopher of science Michael Ruse admitted: ‘Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.’

    Despite the heavy handed tactics used against Darwinism dissenters, Darwinists often appeal to alleged scientific consensus as a way to attempt to justify their empirically weak and counterfactual paradigm. So when quotes of evolutionists admitting weaknesses of evolutionist are pointed out, this can cause a significant amount of cognitive dissonance within evolutionists. It is also upsetting to Darwinist zealots who don’t want the major and minor shortcomings of evolutionary beliefs mentioned to others.

    Quote mining does not refer simply to quoting out of context, as there is already a well-understood phrase for that. Rather, the charge of ‘quote mining’ reflects an objection to quoting someone for criticizing his own belief system, on the theory that if he still believes in the system then it is somehow unfair to quote his criticism of it.

    Evolutionists have unfortunately chosen to hold onto their Darwinists religion, despite the fact that evidence which disproves Darwinism has been found repeatedly. This is clearly an anti-scientific practice, as it violates the modern principle of falsifiability: no amount of evidence in favor of a scientific theory has merit if even a single conclusive counterexample can be found …

    Evolutionists are notorious for expressing objection when their quotes are used against them. This reveals the dogmatic nature of their faith, because real scientists always welcome evidence which contradicts mainstream theories … While the entire fields of law and politics encourage quoting an adversary to discredit him, evolutionists do not feel their quotes should be used to criticize evolution, and have invented the term ‘quote mining’ to criticize that practice. They have tried to make quote mining a pejorative term, but the neologism has yet to be recognized by major dictionaries”.

  • Still no link.

    TL/DR. Looked stupid. BTW Creationist are famous for quote mining. They are compulsive liars. Evolutionists do not exist. There are just people who objectively accept scientific findings in biology.

    Why are you so afraid of people reading your quoted?

    When have you stopped being such an obvious liar?

  • You must’ve dropped out from school (schooling in Basic Research Skills). Here’s a refresher for you:

    “Issues to consider in deciding whether a source is reliable include: [1] Who is the author? What are his/her qualifications and reputation? Does he/she have any identifiable biases? [2] Who is the publisher? Is the work self-published? Does the publisher have a history of editorial reputation? Does the publisher have any biases? [3] When was the source published? Is the information outdated? [4] Does the source cite its own sources? Is it based on facts or opinions? [5] Is the source primary, secondary, or tertiary? [6] Are there any obvious errors or omissions?”

    Source: The Wikipedia Library, Find sources, Evaluating sources.

  • And we all know what happened to the indigenous peoples when they couldn’t control the immigration into their land!

  • Here, let me parse it down for you. Clear your man-cave, boning table now; only this is important from here on. And I’ll do this only once:

    U.S. Department
    of Homeland Security
    November 1
    2018
    Myth
    vs.
    Fact
    Caravan

  • Do you think there is a parallel here? The “middle” of the country vs. the urban areas on the coasts, instead of the North and the South have pretty different ideas of the pursuit of happiness.

  • So the current migrants are coming in such large numbers that they will overwhelm the US population, the current migrants have an overwhelming technological advantage over the people of the US, and the current migrants are bringing diseases that will wipe out large percentages of our population. No wonder we are so paranoid.

  • And also how to use refugees (potential future voters),for their own benefit.

    So how many in the caravan, have YOU signed to take in your house?

  • And you must’ve become lazier and lazier in The Age of Computers. Too bad, because DOIs are just not designed for such “people”-species like yours:

    FYII (For Your Insult to the Intelligence):

    “Digital Object Identifier or DOI is a persistent identifier or handle used to uniquely identify objects, standardized by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). An implementation of the Handle System, DOIs are in wide use mainly to identify academic, professional, and government information, such as journal articles, research reports and data sets, and official publications though they also have been used to identify other types of information resources, such as commercial videos. … The DOI for a document remains fixed over the lifetime of the document, whereas its location and other metadata may change. Referring to an online document by its DOI is supposed to provide a more stable link than simply using its URL. But every time a URL changes, the publisher has to update the metadata for the DOI to link to the new URL. It is the publisher’s responsibility to update the DOI database. If they fail to do so, the DOI resolves to a dead link leaving the DOI useless.”

    Source: Wikipedia’s sources, of course – DUH.

  • Right – illegal penetration of the border should result in arrest, trial, and either deportation or imprisonment and then deportation.

    A second offense, and it’s imprisonment period, and not in a facility that results in a better standard of living then you had in your country of origin.

    Renting space in a Mexican prison might accomplish that.

  • The current migrants go through a fairly standard process which vets them, ensures they can support themselves, and regulates numbers.

    The discussion is about illegal entrants and seekers of asylum which bypass the normal immigration laws and procedures.

  • One of the resident pundits thinks he has the answer:

    https://pantheon-live.religionnews.com/2018/11/07/the-end-of-the-protestant-majority-and-other-midterm-religious-results/

    But it does not take a visit to Sodom on the Bay to note that once you leave the American middle you feel like turning to the person next to you and saying “I don’t think we’re in Kansas anymore”.

    In the pendulum of trends, which go back and forth over time, we’ve probably seen the peak of the so-called Nones and the inhabitants of Sodom.

    And the reason is fairly simple: they either don’t reproduce or they reproduce at a lower rate than the folks who go to church or synagogue.

    In the long run it’s a self-correcting phenomenon.

  • None from the caravan but I have been volunteering with refugees for years. Have you done anything for anyone less fortunate than you? Or are you just another Christian in name only piece of sh&this? I suspect the latter.

  • Oh also you might want to read your constitution…only citizens can vote. It would be a very very long time before any of these people could vote. Do that little conspiracy theory can be laid to rest.

  • “Faith leaders” (with a line across the 2 words) don’t just “heap”; they “conspire”. 1st is bad enough, 2nd a whole lot worse. Prophecy of The Anti-Christ Beast reveals its conspiracy with The Multi-National Beast. That’s the one phenomenon to really watch out for.

  • Yes…………very good. Thanks for the elaboration. But I thought “Conspiracy Theory” was tin foil hat stuff! Just kidding.

    Conspiracy — a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.

    Amazing how the Pavlovian Response to someone calling another a ‘conspiracy theorist’ simply silences the debate. How did we get so stupid?!!!

  • Spuddie’s Self-Fulfilling Tasseography dating November 10, 2018: “Trump … inspire[d] mass murder at the border [crossings].”

    (Lucky he’s not listed somewhere between Genesis and Malachi as a false prophet who happened to be a religion-news enthusiast, if pop atheist as well.)

  • You & me both, bud!

    BWAHAHA

    Gotta read between the lines between mainstream media, fake news and conspiracy theory, is what my Grandma used to tell me. And oh yeah, she wore Army Boots, too!

  • I see no mention of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops condemning Trumpsky’s most recent order. Although a number of Catholic individuals, organizations, and groups have signed the letter to Congress opposing the president’s plans, I could find no names of individual U.S. Catholic hierarchs on the list.

    Why did no Catholic hierarch sign the letter to Congress? To curry favor with influential Catholic benefactors who don’t like Matthew 25’s “I was a stranger and you welcomed me”???

    Shameful.

  • Trumpsky “does some of these things” to maintain support of his reactionary/fundamentalist base.

  • Didn’t read. People who give cut and pastes without linked support are liars by nature and are afraid of people seeing what they typed in context.

  • Liar is afraid of showing his work and is a little snowflake about being called out for obvious quote mining. Poor thing.

  • Plently legal of points of entry – no?
    San Diego and El Paso being two.
    But this isn’t about the law is it?

  • it’s a self-correcting phenomenon, for mostly Catholics. That’s why I think Catholics are being attacked on social issues. But the climate for having children can be applied only if there is peace. I’m guessing the Democrats think they’re smart enough to run a “limited” war, in the mideast. 2020 will be another rotten election. But, hey we’ve got a couple years! Thanks for talking.

  • “Plently [sic] legal of points of entry – no?”

    Ask a border crosser.

    “But this isn’t about the law is it?”

    No, it’s about Matthew 25.

  • Any political commentary containing “Trumpsky”, birther nonsense, supposed psychological evaluations, and other non-contributive personal assessments of anyone starts at fourth down the entire field to go with me.

    Attributions of the outcome to racism, the Russians, aliens from outer space, evangelicals, and so on are eyewash for sore losers.

    Hillary was a lousy candidate, outside uber-liberal Yellow Dog Democrat states (e.g., California) had zero credibility, a large part of middle America holds values contrary to her own, and she lost fair and square.

    Get over it.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/large-majorities-dislike-political-correctness/572581/

    The more Clinton talked about the Latino vote, the black vote, the gay vote, the woman vote, the more Americans tired of the same old identity politics pandering.

    https://www.hoover.org/research/why-trump-won

    “Hillary Clinton never got beyond her email scandals, the pay-for-play Clinton Foundation wrongdoing, and the Wikileaks and Guccifer hackings reminded the electorate that whatever Trump was or had done, he at least had not brazenly broken federal law as a public servant, or colluded with the media and the Republican National Committee to undermine the integrity of the primaries and sabotage his Republican rivals.”

    https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DDxH7V8MlK8/W5FqhhI2teI/AAAAAAAAVqM/94RTZqiBDNcQlBxXwiWAb4EUU9Cl17wGACEwYBhgL/s1600/Flight%2BRisk%2B7.jpg

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/29/opinion/2016-exit-polls-election.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/11/is-this-what-they-call-a-dog-whistle.php

  • I have in front of me, a ‘thank you’ letter from the Patriarch of Babylon for Chaldeans, Louis Sako. Patriarch Sako’s flock fled from a hell hole far worse the this “caravan” for a better life. They were fleeing from literally being butchered.

  • Well it would be logical if the dead can vote (“Landslide” Lyndon Johnson, or Chicago),, why not undocumented immigrants?

    You forgot to answer my question:
    So how many in the caravan, have YOU signed to take in your house?

  • Good for you. I misjudged you based on what you wrote on this blog. Maybe one day your inner good will manifest itself in your writings.

  • What’s so terrible about insisting that anyone wanting to receive asylum status must not violate our immigration laws? If they want the benefit of our laws, then they should respect our laws.

  • You have a magnificent gift, you can discern the “inner good” from a few words on a blog site.

    With such a talent, I suspect you are a successful bookie.

  • Well others disagree. Your comment is a farce. Many Americans support asylum programs.

    Your comment is ignorant and not thoughtful at all.

  • When you cross borders who can mention you are seeking asylum and then you get processed.

    The outcome is dependent on administrators and the case.

    That is how the law works.

  • Speaking of ignorant and not thoughtful at all, in our system “many” does not constitute a majority.

    The proper forum for this discussion and a resolution is the Congress, not Executive Orders.

ADVERTISEMENTs