The USCCB, waterboarding and immigration laws.
Now the Catholic bishops are in full voice decrying Arizona's new law dealing with the problem of illegal aliens.
The one problem they exhibit here, as at similar times (such as when they wholeheartedly denounced water boarding as "torture") is a failure to provide guidance as to what actually CAN be done.
If specific measures are found unacceptable then specific substitutes should be cited. Giving the "shipyard salute" when asked what exactly would be acceptable doesn't cut it. Too often that is exactly what happens, the naysayers are loaded with "thou shalt nots" but lacking in just what "thou shalt" is able to obtain a desired goal. That goal can be avoiding another 9/11/01 type massacre or making a border state safer for the legal residents.
The one problem they exhibit here, as at similar times (such as when they wholeheartedly denounced water boarding as "torture") is a failure to provide guidance as to what actually CAN be done.
If specific measures are found unacceptable then specific substitutes should be cited. Giving the "shipyard salute" when asked what exactly would be acceptable doesn't cut it. Too often that is exactly what happens, the naysayers are loaded with "thou shalt nots" but lacking in just what "thou shalt" is able to obtain a desired goal. That goal can be avoiding another 9/11/01 type massacre or making a border state safer for the legal residents.
"shipyard salute"
Or just STFU and stop being a backseat driver.
13 comments:
A hearty AMEN!
Subvet, you are being unjust here. The bishops role is to provide moral guidance - not political alternatives.
The people of Arizona have a right to expect laws to be enforced. They also have a right to create laws. Sometimes, those laws may not be the embodiment of justice. They may even cross moral lines. It IS within the purview of the bishops to call that out, and they don't have to provide an alternative before speaking on the morality of what has been done or is being planned.
You may disagree with their assessment, but to demand that they have a solution before speaking on morality is plain unjust.
A good Catholic response is to look at what they are saying and prayerfully consider it. They are our shepherds. God has given them to us. We must prudently consider their guidance on moral issues, and how we treat our fellow man IS a moral issue.
As for waterboarding - torture is ALWAYS wrong - even if there is no alternative. There is no legitimate moral defense of torture.
Cliff, thanks for that.
Rev. Gregori, no need to be sorry. We're both on the same wavelength here.
RobK, I agree with the role of the bishops. But why is it that "moral guidance" is most prominent on issues that cater to those of a liberal political mindset? This includes private ownership of firearms (the bishops came out against it in the late 70's if my memory is correct), deterrence of nuclear aggression via the arms race (say what you want, it worked.), the first Gulf War (JP II never admitted to the positive aspects of the liberation of Kuwait), the list could go on and on.
I admit that they recently spoke out against voting for a proabort Presidential candidate and against the healthcare reform bill. But the protests were lukewarm as compared to items such as the current uproar over illegal aliens. It would seem that only with regret do our "sheperds" abandon politically correct positions (as a comparison, note Cardinal Mahoney's reticence on abortion).
As for being unjust in demanding they have a viable alternative before they speak, in this particular case I feel my sentiments are justified. The social services of southern border states are strained due to illegal alien patronage, crime has been adversely affected, etc.
We're at a point where everyone is either a part of the problem or a part of the solution.
Regarding waterboarding as "torture", the jury is still out on that one. Several Catholic writers (Deal Hudson comes immediately to mind) take issue with that one and feel the use of it is justified within narrow parameters.
While we're on the topic of torture, it would really help if there was specific guidance here. Seems any act can be classified as torture if that classification suits someone's agenda. This includes such ludicrous examples as deeming repetitive playing of the theme from "Barney" as torture (I'm not kidding, Amnesty International actually stated that a few years back.)
When many of the acts listed (sleep deprivation, exposure to temperature extremes, etc.) are things routinely experienced by our own military and public servants the whole topic gets unreal.
For myself, it would seem the INTENT of the act would matter more. If my INTENT is to make someone miserable just to get my cookies off, that would be torture. If the INTENT is to obtain information that would save innocent lives, that should be justified.
But as the wordgame is presently played, it's all about scoring political points. Our Church, our nation and our children deserve better.
Father Gregori,
I respectfully offer that you might want to re-read the CCC. #2241 is most relevant - as citizens of the wealthiest country we have an obligation to those seeking immigration for just reasons, and providing for one's family is a just reason.
Subvet,
If something is wrong it is wrong. One has a duty to we all have a duty to say so - especially a bishop. That is pretty simple and uncomplicated.
Most often we want to demand an alternative when we don't like the implications of what is being said. As someone who lives in a border state, I understand the need for a solution - but that is beside the point. Our bishops have a right and duty to speak out when they see something immoral.
As for waterboarding, I am not going to deal with wheter it wasn't torture - the arguments that it wasn't are obviously wrong on their face. The "arguments" for it are so obviously rationalization it is embarrassing. Once past that, there is one simple Catholic principle involved - an end NEVER justifies a means.
Btw, I think the bishops aren't quite right on this issue because they are missing the need for immigrant to respect the law - giving to Caesar what is Caesar's.
I just had a V-8 moment. The Most Rev. Gregori wrote the best answer to this issue that I have ever seen. I'm going to have to "borrow" his answer. I was going to say "steal," but I'm already coveting it, so we'll keep this at one sin.
Subvet, I disagree with RobKPhD. There's a reason why PhD stands for BS "Piled Higher and Deeper." Standing on the sidelines criticizing without offering an alternative makes the Bishops a part of the problem and not a part of the solution.
RobK, the Most Rev. Gregori is a bishop in his own church (not Catholic). Quoting the Catechism would have no traction with the man.
As for Article 2241, it states "The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able..." Even in the more prosperous times of the recent past 12 million plus illegals have put a strain on our social services, schools, etc. With the current recession, continuing as we have is suicidal.
2241 also states, "Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various judicial conditions,..."
More follows and it only further justifies the passage of Arizona's law.
As for your perspective as a resident of a border state, sorry but it doesn't cut any ice. Living in Texas on what I'm certain is a tighter budget than yourself (and all that implies as to living conditions) I've a more intimate acquaintance of daily dealings with our brothers from the south. As an example, I just recently placed poison in my yard to get rid of the neighbor's cats that have roamed free and fancied turning my property into their litter box. Chances are that isn't necessary with any Hispanics you'd count as neighbors.
And the cats haven't been around lately. I'll bet the local vet appreciates the uptick in business.
FWIW, I DON'T like killing what is probably the cherished pet of some child. But I dislike the increased likelihood of my own children being bit by a rabid feline less.
As for, "...there is one simple Catholic principle involved - an end NEVER justifies a means." Sorry, but my reading of Church history and how our "shepherds" have bent to the winds of political expedience leads me to think otherwise.
Your comment regarding the bishop's failure to remind the illegal aliens of their own responsibilitie is dead on target. If they were more evenhanded in their approach to this issue there would be a lot less dissent in the pews. I know I'd certainly be less irritated than now.
As it is, the USCCB seems intent on being what one blogger described as, "the Democratic Party at prayer".
USA is T R I L L I O N S in debt.
How does that make us a wealthy nation?
Rev. Gregori, you've mentioned the elephant in the living room. The problem is with ILLEGAL aliens and it's the ILLEGAL aliens towards whom the bill is directed.
Cliff, damn it, there you go using common sense!
as a quite new Catholic....I must say...the USCCB does nothing for me.
and can someone explain why I should listen to a group of bishops from the other side of the country rather than the bishop of my diocese?.....
oh, by the way, EVERY OTHER NATION kicks people who come to it illegally OUT. or throws them in prison. what makes this wrong for the USA??
Let me play back for you what I hear on this blog.
America (the richest country in the world) is poor because we maxed out our credit card. Poor us - biggest economy in the world have a tough time. Let's shrug off our responsibilities to our neighbors and treat them like our enemy (were we supposed to love either of those groups - neighbors and enemies?)
And let's just string these guys up right. I mean, what right do they have to make it better for their family? If they starve in Mexico, I mean a father shouldn't do whatever it takes to help his family. What a fool to think he should do whatever it takes. Hell there just a bunch of lazy criminal, freeloaders. Mercy? Compassion? Heck, not for that bunch.
And PhD.s, darn thats just nonsense. And oh yeah, they must not know what real Mexicans are like because they don't kill the neighbor's cats. Heck, I can just assume I know what his life is like (just like those Mexicans - I know all about all of 'em).
Those illegals deserve every bit of our scorn because they are ILLLEGAL. Demand rights - who do they think they are, HUMAN????
Is that how you want to sound?
Because it is how you do sound.
Common sense? More like nonsense.
Sorry, I am out of here.
Your welcome to your opinions and your stubbornness. Be careful though, I am not sure these opinions you are sharing put you on the right path to things more important.
RobK, (yawn) come back later when you have less time.
Post a Comment